Item 19 - Attachment A - Exhibit A - Appendix I - Noise Technical Report
Appendix I
Noise Technical Report
Noise Technical Report
for The Farm in Poway Project
Prepared for:
City of Poway
13325 Civic Center Drive
Poway, California 92064
Contact: David De Vries, City Planner
Prepared by:
605 Third Street
Encinitas, California 92024
Contacts: Connor Burke, Environmental Analyst;
Mark Storm, INCE Bd. Cert.
FEBRUARY 2020
Printed on 30% post-consumer recycled material.
11872
i February 2020
Table of Contents
SECTION PAGE NO.
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................................................................ III
1 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................ 1
2 REGULATORY SETTING ..................................................................................................................................... 7
3 EXISTING CONDITIONS ................................................................................................................................... 11
4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE .................................................................................................................... 15
5 IMPACT DISCUSSION ...................................................................................................................................... 17
6 MITIGATION MEASURES ................................................................................................................................. 35
7 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ................................................................................................................................ 41
8 REFERENCES CITED ....................................................................................................................................... 43
APPENDICES
A Noise Measurement Field Data
B Construction Noise Modeling Input and Output
C Traffic Noise Modeling Input and Output
D Operation Scenarios - Events at The Barn and The Meadow
FIGURES
1 Project Vicinity ...................................................................................................................................................... 3
2 Site Plan ................................................................................................................................................................ 5
3 Noise Measurement Locations ........................................................................................................................ 13
NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE FARM IN POWAY PROJECT
11872
ii February 2020
TABLES
1. Measured Community Outdoor Noise Levels .................................................................................................. 11
2 Construction Phase Distance to Nearest Pre-Existing Noise-Sensitive Receptors (in feet) ......................... 17
3 Typical Construction Equipment Maximum Noise Levels ............................................................................... 18
4 Construction Noise Modeling Summary Results – The Club .......................................................................... 19
5 Construction Noise Modeling Summary Results – The Meadow ................................................................... 20
6 Construction Noise Modeling Summary Results – The Barn ......................................................................... 20
7 Construction Noise Modeling Summary Results – The Working Farm .......................................................... 21
8 Construction Noise Modeling Summary Results – Community Gardens ...................................................... 21
9 Construction Noise Modeling Summary Results – Trail System .................................................................... 22
10 Construction Noise Modeling Summary Results – The Basins ...................................................................... 22
11 Construction Noise Modeling Summary Results – New Homes .................................................................... 23
12 Construction Noise Modeling Summary Results – Private Street .................................................................. 24
13 Traffic Noise Modeling Results......................................................................................................................... 26
14 Future Ambient Noise Levels at Residential Facades .................................................................................... 27
11872
iii February 2020
Acronyms and Abbreviations
Acronym/Abbreviation Definition
AC acre
Caltrans California Department of Transportation
City City of Poway
County County of San Diego
CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level
CNMP construction noise management plan
dB decibel
dBA A-weighted decibel
DU dwelling unit
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FTA Federal Transit Administration
HP horsepower
ips inches per second
Ldn day–night average noise level
Leq equivalent noise level over a given period
Lmax sound energy level averaged over a specified time period
Ln statistical sound level
MM Mitigation Measure
OS-C Open Space – Conservation
OS-R Open Space - Recreation
PPV peak particle velocity
proposed project The Farm in Poway Project
RCNM Roadway Construction Noise Model
RMS Root mean square
ST short-term noise measurement locations
VdB Velocity decibel
NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE FARM IN POWAY PROJECT
11872
iv February 2020
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
11872
1 February 2020
1 Introduction and Background
This assessment was conducted to address potential noise impacts from the proposed The Farm in Poway Project
(proposed project), a residential subdivision with a variety of open spaces and public recreation facilities to be
located within a former country club property in the City of Poway (City). The assessment includes examination of
noise generation from project construction and project related traffic, and also evaluates future potential noise
exposure levels at sample locations of proposed future residences. Construction activity vibration is also evaluated
as part of this assessment.
Project Description
The project site is located in the northern portion of the City and consists of the decommissioned StoneRidge
Country Club and its associated 18-hole golf course. The project site bordered by Espola Road to the south, and
existing residential communities along St. Andrews Drive to the west and north. The eastern boundary largely
adjoins existing homes along Cloudcroft Drive, Tam O’Shanter Drive, and Boca Raton Lane. The project site consists
of approximately 117.2 acres and currently has an address of 17166 Stoneridge Country Club Lane, Poway,
California 92064. Figure 1 shows the project location within the County of San Diego (County) and the City.
Regionally, the City is situated near the middle of the County, approximately 20 miles north of downtown San Diego
via I-15. The project site is approximately 2 miles east of I-15. The City of Poway boundary is approximately 0.5
miles to the west. Figure 2 depicts an aerial view of the project site vicinity.
The proposed project includes a total of 160 single-family homes and a mix of open space and recreational uses
open to the public (see Figure 2, Site Plan) that include the following: The Barn (a multi-purpose event space [e.g.,
weddings]), The Social (café with outdoor dining), The Butterfly Farm (greenhouse and picnic area), The Club
(outdoor pool, tennis courts, and paddleball courts), The Meadow (featuring an amphitheater-style venue for
outdoor concerts), a Tot Lot (children play area), a Trail System and pedestrian sidewalks, a Dog Park, and Agri-
fields (a.k.a., “the Working Farm”). Uses permitted within the Specific Plan are shown on Table 3.1: Land Use
Summary and Exhibit 3.1: Land Use Plan in Chapter 3 of the Specific Plan. Residential land uses would compose
approximately 33.85 acres and would range in density from 2.5 to 10.7 dwelling units per acre (DU/AC). Open
space uses would compose approximately 70.37 acres and would be comprised of Open Space – Conservation
(OS-C) and Open Space – Recreational (OS-R). Approximately 12.96 acres would be private streets.
Noise Characteristics
Sound is mechanical energy transmitted by pressure waves in a compressible medium, such as air. Noise is defined
as sound that is loud, unpleasant, unexpected, or undesired. The sound pressure level (SPL) has become the most
common descriptor used to characterize the loudness of an ambient sound level. The unit of measurement of sound
pressure is a decibel (dB). Under controlled conditions in an acoustics laboratory, the trained, healthy human ear
is able to discern changes in sound levels of 1 dB when exposed to steady, single-frequency signals in the mid-
frequency range. Outside such controlled conditions, the trained ear can detect changes of 2 dB in normal
environmental noise. It is widely accepted that the average healthy ear, however, can barely perceive noise level
changes of 3 dB. A change of 5 dB is readily perceptible, and a change of 10 dB is perceived as twice or half as
loud (Caltrans 2013a). A doubling of sound energy results in a 3-dB increase in sound, which means that a doubling
of sound energy (e.g., doubling the number of daily trips along a given road) would result in a barely perceptible
change in sound level.
NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE FARM IN POWAY PROJECT
11872
2 February 2020
Sound may be described in terms of level or amplitude (measured in decibels), frequency or pitch (measured in
hertz, or cycles per second), and duration (measured in seconds or minutes). Because the human ear is not equally
sensitive to sound at all frequencies, a special frequency-dependent rating scale is used to relate noise to human
sensitivity. The A-weighted decibel (dBA) scale performs this compensation by discriminating against low and very
high frequencies in a manner approximating the sensitivity of the human ear.
Several descriptors of noise (noise metrics) exist to help predict average community reactions to the adverse effects
of environmental noise, including traffic-generated noise. These descriptors include the equivalent noise level over
a given period (Leq), the statistical sound level (Ln), the day–night average noise level (Ldn), and the Community
Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL). Each of these descriptors uses units of dBA.
Leq is a sound level energy-averaged over a specified time period, represented by a single constant value equivalent
to the variable sound energy received at a location. For example, a 1-hour Leq measurement would represent the
average amount of energy contained in all the noise that occurred in that hour. Leq is an effective noise descriptor
because it allows convenient comparison of time-varying sound levels at different locations. Lmax is the greatest
sound level measured during a designated time interval or event.
Unlike the Leq metrics, Ldn and CNEL metrics always represent 24-hour periods. Ldn and CNEL also differ from Leq
because they apply a time-weighted factor designed to emphasize noise events that occur during the evening and
nighttime hours (when speech and sleep disturbance is of more concern). “Time weighted” refers to the fact that
Ldn and CNEL penalize noise that occurs during certain sensitive periods. In the case of CNEL, noise occurring during
the daytime (7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.) receives no penalty. Noise during the evening hours (7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.)
is penalized by adding 5 dB to the measured or predicted Leq values, and nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) noise
is penalized by adding 10 dB. Ldn differs from CNEL in that the daytime period is defined as 7:00 a.m. to 10:00
p.m., thus eliminating the evening period. Ldn and CNEL are the predominant criteria used to measure roadway
noise affecting residential receptors. These two metrics generally differ from one another by no more than 0.5–1
dB, and are thus often considered comparable or even equivalent and interchangeable by many jurisdictions.
Vibration is the oscillatory movement of solid mass. Like sound, it is described in terms of frequency and amplitude,
which can be expressed as displacement, velocity, or acceleration. For purposes of this analysis and consistent
with environmental assessment, vibration is presented and discussed herein as units of velocity (inches per second
[ips]) and their decibel equivalents as appropriate. Vibration impacts to buildings are generally discussed in terms
of peak particle velocity (PPV), while human annoyance or disturbance is often discussed with root-mean-square
(RMS) vibration velocity levels that are converted to decibels (VdB). But for purposes of this analysis, PPV will be
used to describe all vibration for ease of reading and comparison. Vibration can impact people, structures, and
sensitive equipment or processes (Caltrans 2013b). Common sources of vibration within communities include
construction activities and railroad operations. Groundborne vibration generated by construction projects exhibits
highest amplitudes during pile driving, rock blasting, soil compacting, jack hammering, and demolition-related
activities that involve sudden impacts or other transient impulses of energy delivered to soil and rock strata.
Vibration can also be more regularly occurring or even continuous in nature, such as the steady operation of
mechanical equipment featuring reciprocating or rotating components that are slightly imbalanced. The maximum
vibration level standard used by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) for the prevention of
structural damage to typical residential buildings is 0.3 ips PPV (Caltrans 2013b).
Date: 6/24/2019 - Last saved by: agreis - Path: Z:\Projects\j1187201\MAPDOC\NOISE\Figure1-SiteVicinity.mxdValley VerdeNeighborhoodPark
INDIANCANYONLN
P
ENIN
A
S
T
OLD WINERYRD
DECANTDR PORT MARNOCK
DR
TAWNY WAY D ORS ET WAY
SOLERAWAY
TAM O SHANTER DR
ORCHARDBENDRDESPOLA RD
STARMOUNTWAY
B U T T E R F IE L D T R LEDINA WAY
SAINT ANDREWS DR
ALDERWOODL
NVINTER WAY THESQ U A R EC A LLE COLINA
OLD
WINERY
WAY
CUV EECTCIELO CTMERLOTPLLOMASVERDES DR
VILLAMOURA DR
VENDORPLTINING DR
CLOUDCROFTC TCLEECOPL
VALLE VERD ETERMARTINCOIT RDOLDCOA
C
H
R
D
WESTLINGCTOL
D
W
I
N
E
M
A
S
T
E
R
W
A
Y
ANTELOPESTATION
V ALLEVERDERDSAGEWOOD DR
DE
L
P
A
S
O
D
R
VALLEDELOBO DR
SAGEWOODLNJOYAS CT
CORTELOMASVERDESVINEYARDLN
BOCARATONLNVIA LO MA D R
CLIQUOTCTWILLOW RUN RD
OVERLAND PASS
WHITE ROCK STATION RD
WHITE W O O D CANYON
CLOUDCROFT DR
ASH HOLLOWXINGRD
Project Vicinity
The Farm in Poway
SOURCE: SANGIS 2017, 2019
0 500250Feet
Project Boundary
FIGURE 1
NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE FARM IN POWAY PROJECT
11872
4 February 2020
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Not to Scale
Site Plan
The Farm in Poway
FIGURE 2SOURCE: The Farm in Poway, LLC, 2020Z:\Projects\j1187201\MAPDOC\IS
NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE FARM IN POWAY PROJECT
11872
6 February 2020
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
11872
7 February 2020
2 Regulatory Setting
Regulatory Setting
Federal
Federal Transit Administration
In its Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment guidance manual, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA)
recommends a daytime construction noise level threshold of 80 dBA Leq over an 8-hour period (FTA 2018) when
“detailed” construction noise assessments are performed to evaluate potential impacts to community residences
surrounding a project. Although this FTA guidance is not a regulation, it can serve as a quantified standard in the
absence of such limits at the State and local jurisdictional levels.
State
California Code of Regulations, Title 24
Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations sets standards which new development in California must meet.
According to Title 24, interior noise levels are not to exceed 45 dB CNEL for new multifamily residences, hotels, and
other attached residences.
Title 24 also requires that an interior acoustical study demonstrating that interior noise levels due to exterior
sources will be less than or equal to 45 CNEL be performed for affected multifamily structures and hotels that are
exposed to exterior noise levels in excess of 60 CNEL.
California Department of Health Services Guidelines
The State Department of Health Services has developed guidelines of community noise acceptability for use by
local agencies (OPR 2003). Selected relevant levels are listed here:
Below 60 dBA CNEL: normally acceptable for low-density residential use
50 to 70 dBA: conditionally acceptable for low-density residential use
Below 65 dBA CNEL: normally acceptable for high-density residential use and transient lodging
60 to 70 dBA CNEL: conditionally acceptable for high-density residential, transient lodging, churches,
educational, and medical facilities.
The normally acceptable exterior noise level for transient lodging use is up to 65 dBA CNEL. Conditional acceptable
exterior noise levels range up to 70 dBA CNEL for transient lodging.
California Department of Transportation
In its Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, Caltrans recommends a vibration velocity
threshold of 0.2 ips PPV (Caltrans 2013b) for assessing “annoying” vibration impacts to occupants of residential
structures. Although this Caltrans guidance is not a regulation, it can serve as a quantified standard in the absence
of such limits at the local jurisdictional level. Similarly, thresholds to assess building damage risk due to
NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE FARM IN POWAY PROJECT
11872
8 February 2020
construction vibration vary with the type of structure and its fragility, but tend to range between 0.3 ips and 0.4 ips
PPV for typical residential structures (Caltrans 2013b).
Local
City of Poway Noise Municipal Code
Section 8.08.040 and 8.08.100 of the Poway Municipal Code establishes sound level limits within the City and
describes regulations on construction equipment, respectively. These sections are reproduced or summarized below.
8.08.040 Sound Level Limits
Unless a variance has been applied for and granted pursuant to this chapter, it is unlawful for any person to cause
or allow the creation of any noise to the extent that the one-hour average sound level, at any point on or beyond the
boundaries of the property on which the sound is produced, exceeds the applicable limits set forth below, except
that construction noise level limits shall be governed by PMC 8.08.100. In addition, the Noise Element addresses
nuisance noise and states that it should be unlawful for any person to make or continue any loud, unnecessary noise
that causes annoyance to any reasonable person of normal sensitivity.
Zone or Land Use Designation Allowable Time
Applicable Limit One-
Hour Average Sound
Level (In decibels)
OS-RM, OS, OS/1du, RR-A, RR-B, RR-C, RS-2, RS-3,
RS-4, RS-7, and Specific Plan, PRD and PC
regulations with a density of 11 dwelling units or less
per acre
10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. 40
7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. 50
PF, RA, RC, MHP, and Specific Plan, PRD and PC
regulations with a density of 11 or more dwelling
units per acre
7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. 55
7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. 50
10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. 45
SPC, MU, CO, CN, CB, CG, TC, A/GC and HC 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. 60
7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. 55
10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. 50
MRE, SC, LI, LI/S and IP Anytime 70
The sound level limit at a location on a boundary between two zoning districts is the arithmetic mean of the
respective limits for the two districts
Fixed location public utility distribution or transmission facilities located on or adjacent to a property line shall be
subject to the noise level limits of this section, measured at or beyond six feet from the boundary of the easement
upon which the equipment is located.
NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE FARM IN POWAY PROJECT
11872
9 February 2020
8.08.100 Construction Equipment
Except for emergency work, it is unlawful for any person, including the City, to operate any single or combination of
powered construction equipment at any construction site, except as outlined in subsections A and B of this section:
A. It is unlawful for any person, including the City, to operate any single or combination of powered
construction equipment at any construction site before 7:00 a.m. or after 5:00 p.m. on Mondays through
Saturdays or at any time on a Sunday or holiday except as provided below. For purposes of this section,
“construction” does not include minor home repairs, lawn mowing, gardening and similar types of routine
maintenance as identified in PMC 8.08.170(D).
1. The City Engineer may permit, in writing, the use of powered construction equipment during specific
hours before 7:00 a.m. or after 5:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday, or any time on a Sunday or holiday,
if he or she determines that such operations are not detrimental to the health, safety, or welfare of the
surrounding community, that the conduct of the activity is limited by the nature of the work, and that it
is in the best interest of the public to perform the work outside of normal hours and days of work.
2. A residential property owner constructing a single-family residence, or constructing an addition to, or
otherwise modifying, a single-family residence for personal occupancy may operate powered
construction equipment on Sundays or holidays between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. in
compliance with the requirements of subsection B of this section; provided, that:
a. The type of equipment used is limited to handheld construction equipment or equipment powered
by small electrical motors, including, but not limited to, small cement mixers, table saws, and
similar small equipment; and
b. The construction is not carried out for profit or livelihood. Upon request of the City, a property owner
shall provide documentation, to the satisfaction of the Director of Development Services, of
personal occupancy of the residence, or the intent to personally occupy the residence.
B. No such equipment, or combination of equipment regardless of age or date of acquisition, shall be operated
so as to cause noise at a level in excess of 75 decibels for more than eight hours during any 24- hour period
when measured at or within the property lines of any property which is developed and used either in part
or in whole for residential purposes. These sound levels shall be corrected for time duration in accordance
with the following table:
Total Duration in 24 Hours Decibel Level Allowance Total Decibel Level
Up to 15 Minutes +15 90
Up to 30 Minutes +12 87
Up to 1 Hour +9 84
Up to 2 Hours +6 81
Up to 4 Hours +3 78
Up to 8 Hours 0 75
In the event that lower noise limit standards are established for construction equipment pursuant to State or
Federal law, said lower limits shall be used as a basis for revising and amending the noise level limits specified in
subsection B of this section.
NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE FARM IN POWAY PROJECT
11872
10 February 2020
Poway General Plan
The General Plan EIR Section 5.10 establishes the following mitigation measure related to noise. Development
within the City of Poway, including the Specific Plan planning area, is subject to these measures: “6. The City of
Poway shall ensure a safe and pleasant acoustical environment for the residents of Poway through site planning,
zoning regulations, architectural design standards, and building construction regulations.”
Proposed Specific Plan
The Farm in Poway Specific Plan (Specific Plan) adopts noise level thresholds that are summarized by the following
excerpts (SMA Ventures LLC 2019):
Section 3.2.3, Additional Open Space Standards, “(7) The noise level emanating from any use or activity
shall not exceed 60 dBA CNEL, as the acceptable outdoor noise exposure level when measured at at the
exterior boundaries of the Specific Plan area unless otherwise specified herein. This may be achieved through
the construction of sound attenuation barriers based upon an approved noise study.”
Section 3.2.3.B, under the description for regular events: “The aggregate sounds level from live (acoustic)
or amplified music does not exceed the maximum total weighted decibel (dBA) at a distance of 10 feet as
specified in Table 3.4: Event Sound Levels.” For convenience, Table 3.4 from the Specific Plan is
reproduced below:
Venue Location and Time of Regular Event
(up to 3 hours duration)
Maximum Total A-weighted Decibel (dBA) at a
Distance of 10 feet1
The Barn + The Social
Daytime (8 a.m. to 7 p.m.)
Evening (7 p.m. to 10 p.m.)
103
98
The Meadow (Amphitheater)
Daytime (8 a.m. to 7 p.m.)
Evening (7 p.m. to 10 p.m.)
97
92
Notes: dBA = A-weighted sound pressure level.
1 If Speakers are positioned to distribute amplified sound, they must be positioned in such a manner that linear occlusion occurs
between the speaker and the nearest residential receptors outside of the Specific Plan area.
Section 3.2.3.C, Dog Parks, “(3) Noise shall be sound attenuated so that the noise level measured at the
exterior boundaries of the Specific Plan area does not exceed 60 dBA CNEL.”
Section 3.3.3, Residential Performance Standards, “The noise level emanating from any residential use or
operation within the Residential (R) Land Use Districts shall not exceed 70 dBA CNEL as the acceptable
outdoor noise exposure level when measured at the property line. The interior noise levels shall not exceed
45 dBA CNEL for all residential uses.”
For purposes of the noise analyses herein and consistent with the Specific Plan, it is assumed that a 70 dBA CNEL
standard represents the applicable noise limit for non-transportation and non-construction “stationary” sources of
noise associated with anticipated typical project-attributed operation and activities at residential land use property
lines within the Specific Plan area. At the property lines of offsite residential land uses that adjoin the exterior
boundary of the Specific Plan area, 60 dBA CNEL would be the standard for impact significance—consistent with
state planning guidelines. These noise sources include operation of heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning (HVAC)
equipment from the newly-created residential and non-residential land uses attributed to the proposed project.
11872
11 February 2020
3 Existing Conditions
Noise measurements were conducted on and near the project site on June 11, 2019, to quantify and help
characterize the existing pre-project outdoor sound environment. Table 1 provides the locations, date, and times
these noise measurements were performed. The noise measurements were taken using a Rion NL-52 sound level
meter equipped with a 0.5-inch, pre-polarized condenser microphone with pre-amplifier. The sound level meter
meets the current American National Standards Institute standard for a Type 1 (Precision Grade) sound level meter.
The accuracy of the sound level meter was verified using a field calibrator before and after the measurements, and
the measurements were conducted with the microphone positioned approximately 5 feet above the ground.
Table 1. Measured Community Outdoor Noise Levels
Receptor Location/Address
Date
(mm:dd:yy)
Time
(hh:mm)
Leq
(dBA)
Lmax
(dBA)
ST1 North of 16616 Espola Rd.
Poway, CA 92064
06.11.19 10:20–10:30 a.m. 64.9 75.1
ST2 South of Multi-Family homes on
Port Marnock Dr.
06.11.19 11:30–11:40 a.m. 43.1 49.9
ST3 South of 17956 St Andrews Dr.
Poway, CA 92064
06.11.19 11:15–11:25 a.m. 42.2 67.5
ST4 East of 17154 Cloudcroft Dr.
Poway, CA 92064
06.11.19 11:00–11:10 a.m. 52.5 64.5
Source: Appendix A.
Notes: Leq = equivalent continuous sound level (time-averaged sound level); Lmax = maximum sound level during the measurement
interval; dBA = A-weighted decibels; ST = short-term noise measurement locations.
The four short-term (ST) noise measurement locations were selected to represent sample existing noise-sensitive
receivers on and near the project site. These locations are depicted as receivers ST1–ST4 on Figure 3, Noise
Measurement Locations. The measured energy-averaged (Leq) and maximum (Lmax) noise levels at these field survey
locations are provided in Table 1. The primary noise sources at the sites identified in Table 1 consisted of traffic along
adjacent roadways; and, the sounds of rustling leaves, aircraft overflights, distant conversation, and birdsong. As
shown in Table 1, the measured sound levels ranged from approximately 42.2 dBA Leq at ST3 to 64.9 dBA Leq at ST1.
More details of the collected noise measurement data can be found in Appendix A, Noise Measurement Field Data.
NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE FARM IN POWAY PROJECT
11872
12 February 2020
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Date: 6/24/2019 - Last saved by: agreis - Path: Z:\Projects\j1187201\MAPDOC\NOISE\Figure3-NoiseMeasurementLocations.mxdValley VerdeNeighborhoodPark
INDIANCANYONLN
P
ENIN
A
S
T
OLD WINERYRD
DECANTDR PORT MARNOCK
DR
TAWNY WAY D ORS ET WAY
SOLERAWAY
TAM O SHANTER DR
ORCHARDBENDRDESPOLA RD
STARMOUNTWAY
B U T T E R F IE L D T R LEDINA WAY
SAINT ANDREWS DR
ALDERWOODL
NVINTER WAY THESQUA R E
C A LLE COLINA
OLD
WINERY
WAY
CUV EECTCIELO CTMERLOTPLLOMASVERDES DR
VILLAMOURA DR
VENDORPLTINING DR
CLOUDCROFTC TCLEECOPL
VALLE VERD ETERMARTINCOIT RDOLDCOA
C
H
R
D
WESTLINGCTOL
D
W
I
N
E
M
A
S
T
E
R
W
A
Y
ANTELOPESTATION
V ALLEVERDERDSAGEWOOD DR
DE
L
P
A
S
O
D
R
VALLEDELOBO DR
SAGEWOODLNJOYAS CT
CORTELOMASVERDESVINEYARDLN
BOCARATONLNVIA LOMA D R
CLIQUOTCTWILLOW RUN RD
OVERLAND PASS
WHITE ROCK STATION RD
WHITE W O O D CANYON
CLOUDCROFT DR
ASH HOLLOWXINGRD
ST1
ST4
ST2
ST3
M1 M2 M3
FIGURE 3
Noise Measurement Locations
The Farm in Poway
SOURCE: SANGIS 2017, 2019
0 500250Feet
Project Boundary
Noise Measurement Locations
Short-term Noise Modeling Location
Modeled Receiver Location
NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE FARM IN POWAY PROJECT
11872
14 February 2020
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
11872
15 February 2020
4 Thresholds of Significance
The following significance criteria are based on Appendix G of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines
(14 CCR 15000 et seq.) and will be used to determine the significance of potential noise impacts. Impacts to noise
would be significant if the proposed project would result in:
a. Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the
project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies.
b. Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels.
c. Expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels (for a project located within
the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been adopted,
within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport).
For this noise assessment and the Specific Plan, up to 70 dBA CNEL noise exposure at the property lines of
residences within the Specific Plan area would be allowed and thus serve as the relevant threshold. At the boundary
lines of existing residences outside of (or adjoining) the Specific Plan area, the threshold would be a more stringent
60 dBA CNEL.
NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE FARM IN POWAY PROJECT
11872
16 February 2020
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
11872
17 February 2020
5 Impact Discussion
a) Would the project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
Short-Term Construction
Less-Than-Significant with Mitigation. Construction noise and vibration are temporary phenomena.
Construction of the development proposed in the project would generate noise that could expose nearby
receptors to elevated noise levels that may disrupt communication and routine activities. The magnitude
of the impact would depend on the type of construction activity, equipment, duration of the construction,
distance between the noise source and receiver, and intervening structures. This section of the report
discusses the noise levels calculated to result from construction of the project, at nearby sensitive receptors
(i.e., existing residences).
The construction activities for the proposed project will be varied by component (i.e., Open Space Land Use
Districts and Residential Land Use Districts) and location. The construction activities located nearest to a
sensitive receptor was used for each phase and component. Representative equipment for residential lot
earthwork and for residential building construction was assembled from similar residential subdivision
projects that Dudek has evaluated for construction noise. Table 2 summarizes the construction phases and
distances to the apparent closest noise-sensitive receptors that are used in the predictive analysis of
construction noise levels at these community locations. Distance values of zero indicate the listed
construction phase is not applicable to the project feature.
Table 2. Construction Phase Distance to Nearest Pre-Existing Noise-Sensitive Receptors (in feet)
Construction
Phase
Project Feature (and distance in feet to nearest NSR)
Residential
The
Farm
The
Meadow The Club
Trail
System
Road
Paving Basin
The
Working
Farm
Community
Garden
Demolition 120 120 0 120 0 0 120 0 0
Site Preparation 50 50 150 50 25 36 15 50 50
Grading 50 50 150 50 25 36 15 50 50
Building
Construction
100 360 0 300 25 0 0 0 0
Paving 0 120 0 50 25 36 0 0 0
Architectural
Finishes
100 360 0 300 0 0 0 0 0
Note: NSR = noise-sensitive receptor.
An Excel-based noise prediction model emulating and using reference data from the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM) (FHWA 2008) was used to estimate
construction noise levels at the nearest occupied noise-sensitive land use. (Although the RCNM was funded
and promulgated by the FHWA, it is often used for non-roadway projects, because the same types of
construction equipment used for roadway projects are often used for other types of construction.) Input
NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE FARM IN POWAY PROJECT
11872
18 February 2020
variables for the predictive modeling consist of the equipment type and number of each (e.g., two graders,
a loader, a tractor), the duty cycle for each piece of equipment (e.g., percentage of time within a specific
time period, such as an hour, when the equipment is expected to operate at full power or capacity and thus
make noise at a level comparable to what is presented in Table 2), and the distance from the noise-sensitive
receiver. The predictive model also considers how many hours that equipment may be on site and operating
(or idling) within an established work shift. No topographical or structural shielding was assumed in the
modeling. The RCNM has default duty-cycle values for the various pieces of equipment, which were derived
from an extensive study of typical construction activity patterns. Those default duty-cycle values were used
for this noise analysis.
Equipment that would be in use during construction would include, in part, graders, backhoes, rubber-tired
dozers, loaders, cranes, forklifts, cement mixers, pavers, rollers, and air compressors. The typical maximum
noise levels for various pieces of construction equipment at a distance of 50 feet are presented in Table 3.
Note that the equipment noise levels presented in Table 3 are maximum noise levels. Typically, construction
equipment operates in alternating cycles of full power and low power, producing average noise levels less
than the maximum noise level. The average sound level of construction activity also depends on the amount
of time that the equipment operates and the intensity of construction activities during that time.
Table 3. Typical Construction Equipment Maximum Noise Levels
Equipment Type Typical Equipment (Lmax, dBA at 50 Feet)
All Other Equipment > 5 HP 85
Backhoe 78
Compressor (air) 78
Concrete Saw 90
Crane 81
Dozer 82
Excavator 81
Flat Bed Truck 74
Front End Loader 79
Generator 72
Grader 85
Man Lift 75
Paver 77
Roller 80
Scraper 84
Welder / Torch 73
Source: DOT 2006.
Notes: dBA = A-weighted decibels; Lmax = maximum sound level.
With the exception of the concrete saw, and as suggested by the list of Lmax values in Table 3, the maximum noise
levels at 50 feet tend not to exceed 85 dBA for common equipment and vehicles anticipated for this kind of multi-use
development project. Hourly Leq values at this distance, however, would vary depending on duty cycle. Construction
noise in a well-defined area typically attenuates at approximately 6 dB per doubling of distance, as each piece of
equipment can be approximated as an individual point-type source. Alternately, a set of equipment in proximity to one
another could be considered geographically a common point source; or, on average with respect to time, a set of
operating equipment with uncertain positions within a defined area could be considered a common point-source.
NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE FARM IN POWAY PROJECT
11872
19 February 2020
Proposed project construction would take place both near and far from adjacent, existing noise-sensitive uses. For
example, construction near the northern project site boundary would appear to take place within approximately 15
feet of existing residential property lines, but during construction of other proposed project components, construction
activities would be much further away from sensitive receptors, as the distance values in Table 3 indicate. Appendix
B provides details on the calculations of estimated construction noise, which are summarized in the following
paragraphs and categorized in a manner similar to what is presented in the project description.
Open Space Land Use Districts
The Club
The Club would be located towards the middle of the project site, north of the R-C residential district (see
Figure 2). Construction activities could occur within 50 feet of the nearest sensitive receiver. Estimated
noise levels from the major construction phases were calculated for the nearest noise-sensitive land use, as
presented in Table 4.
Table 4. Construction Noise Modeling Summary Results – The Club
Construction Phase (expected equipment types)
Estimated 8-hour Leq (dBA)
(at nearest distance per
Table 2)
Demolition (dozer, excavator, concrete saw) 74
Site Preparation (backhoe, dozer, front-end loader) 75
Grading (excavator, grader, scraper) 75
Building Construction (crane, man-lift, generator, backhoe, front-end loader, welder) 64
Paving (paver, roller, other equipment > 5 HP) 74
Architectural Coating (air compressor) 59
Notes: Leq = equivalent continuous sound level (time-averaged sound level); dBA = A-weighted decibel.
As presented in Table 4, the estimated construction noise levels are predicted to be as high as 75 dBA
equivalent continuous sound level (Leq) over an 8-hour period at the nearest existing residences (as close
as 50 feet away) when grading activities take place near the project boundary. Distances to the nearest
noise-sensitive receiver are greater, as shown in Table 3, for activities such as demolition and building
construction and therefore yield lower 8-hour predicted noise levels. Note that these estimated construction
noise levels at a source-to-receiver distance of 50 feet include consideration of limited operation duration
of specific anticipated equipment as detailed in Appendix B. By way of example, a grader might make one
or more passes on site that are this close to the receiver; but, for the remaining time during the day, the
grader is sufficiently farther away—performing work at a more distant location or simply not operating.
Therefore, under these conditions, short-term construction noise would be less than significant.
The Meadow
The Meadow would be located directly adjacent to the east of The Club. Construction activities could occur
within 150 feet of the nearest sensitive receiver. Estimated noise levels from the major construction phases
were calculated for the nearest noise-sensitive land use, as presented in Table 5.
NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE FARM IN POWAY PROJECT
11872
20 February 2020
Table 5. Construction Noise Modeling Summary Results – The Meadow
Construction Phase (expected equipment types)
Estimated 8-hour Leq (dBA)
(at nearest distance per
Table 2)
Site Preparation (backhoe, dozer, front-end loader) 71
Grading (excavator, grader, scraper) 75
Notes: Leq = equivalent continuous sound level (time-averaged sound level); dBA = A-weighted decibel.
As presented in Table 5, the estimated construction noise levels are predicted to be as high as 75 dBA
equivalent continuous sound level (Leq) over an 8-hour period at the nearest existing residences (as close
as 150 feet away) when grading activities take place near the project boundary. Therefore, under these
conditions and since the predicted 75 dBA 8-hour Leq value is compliant with the City’s threshold for
construction noise, short-term construction noise relating to activity for this proposed project feature would
be less than significant.
The Farm (The Barn and Butterfly Farm)
The Farm, a collective reference for both the The Barn and Butterfly Farm proposed project features, would
be located at the southernmost portion of the project site, adjacent to Espola Road and at the proposed
entrance of the project site at the intersection of Espola Road and Martincoit Road (see Figure 2). Construction
activities could occur within 50 feet of the nearest sensitive receiver. Estimated noise levels from the major
construction phases were calculated for the nearest noise-sensitive land use, as presented in Table 6.
Table 6. Construction Noise Modeling Summary Results – The Barn
Construction Phase (expected equipment types)
Estimated 8-hour Leq (dBA)
(at nearest distance per
Table 2)
Demolition (dozer, excavator, concrete saw) 74
Site Preparation (backhoe, dozer, front-end loader) 75
Grading (excavator, grader, scraper) 75
Building Construction (crane, man-lift, generator, backhoe, front-end loader, welder) 63
Paving (paver, roller, other equipment > 5 HP) 72
Architectural Coating (air compressor) 57
Notes: Leq = equivalent continuous sound level (time-averaged sound level); dBA = A-weighted decibel.
As presented in Table 6, the estimated construction noise levels are predicted to be as high as 75 dBA
equivalent continuous sound level (Leq) over an 8-hour period at the nearest existing residences (as close
as 50 feet away) when grading activities take place near the project boundary. Distances to the nearest
noise-sensitive receiver are greater, as shown in Table 3, for activities such as demolition and building
construction and therefore yield lower 8-hour predicted noise levels. Note that these estimated construction
noise levels at a source-to-receiver distance of 50 feet include consideration of limited operation duration
of specific anticipated equipment as detailed in Appendix B. By way of example, a grader might make one
or more passes on site that are this close to the receiver; but, for the remaining time during the day, the
grader is sufficiently farther away—performing work at a more distant location or simply not operating.
Therefore, under these conditions, short-term construction noise would be less than significant.
NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE FARM IN POWAY PROJECT
11872
21 February 2020
The Working Farm (Agri-Fields)
The Working Farm would be composed of agrifields located at the northernmost portion of the project site,
along the northwestern and northern project boundaries (see Figure 2). Construction activities could occur
within 50 feet of the nearest sensitive receiver. Estimated noise levels from the major construction phases
were calculated for the nearest noise-sensitive land use, as presented in Table 7.
Table 7. Construction Noise Modeling Summary Results – The Working Farm
Construction Phase (expected equipment types)
Estimated 8-hour Leq (dBA)
(at nearest distance per
Table 2)
Site Preparation (backhoe, front-end loader) 75
Grading (excavator, grader, scraper) 75
Notes: Leq = equivalent continuous sound level (time-averaged sound level); dBA = A-weighted decibel.
As presented in Table 7, the estimated construction noise levels are predicted to be as high as 75 dBA
equivalent continuous sound level (Leq) over an 8-hour period at the nearest existing residences (as close
as 50 feet away) when grading activities take place near the project boundary. Therefore, under these
conditions and since the predicted 75 dBA 8-hour Leq value is compliant with the City’s threshold for
construction noise, short-term construction noise relating to activity for this proposed project feature would
be less than significant.
Community Gardens
Community gardens would be located throughout the project site, providing future residents a garden plot
within walking distance of their home Construction activities could occur within 50 feet of the nearest
sensitive receiver. Estimated noise levels from the major construction phases were calculated for the nearest
noise-sensitive land use, as presented in Table 8.
Table 8. Construction Noise Modeling Summary Results – Community Gardens
Construction Phase (expected equipment types)
Estimated 8-hour Leq (dBA)
(at nearest distance per
Table 2)
Site Preparation (backhoe, front-end loader) 75
Grading (excavator, grader, scraper) 75
Notes: Leq = equivalent continuous sound level (time-averaged sound level); dBA = A-weighted decibel.
As presented in Table 8, the estimated construction noise levels are predicted to be as high as 75 dBA
equivalent continuous sound level (Leq) over an 8-hour period at the nearest existing residences (as close
as 50 feet away) when grading activities take place near the project boundary. Therefore, under these
conditions and since the predicted 75 dBA 8-hour Leq value is compliant with the City’s threshold for
construction noise, short-term construction noise relating to activity for this proposed project feature would
be less than significant.
NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE FARM IN POWAY PROJECT
11872
22 February 2020
Trail System
A multi-use trail system would circulate throughout the project site to provide mobility and recreational
opportunities for pedestrians and bicyclists. The majority of the trail system would include decomposed
granite or compacted earth trails. Trails along the southwest project boundary would require construction
activities that could occur within 50 feet of the nearest noise-sensitive receiver. On average, this anticipated
distance between trail construction activity and a receiver would be 25 feet. Some accessory structures,
such as a landscaping maintenance shack, would also be installed as part of this construction phase and
could be in similar proximity to an existing noise-sensitive receiver. Estimated noise levels from the major
construction phases for the trail system were calculated for the nearest noise-sensitive land use, as
presented in Table 9.
Table 9. Construction Noise Modeling Summary Results – Trail System
Construction Phase (expected equipment types)
Estimated 8-hour Leq (dBA)
(at nearest distance per
Table 2)
Site Preparation (backhoe, front-end loader) 74
Grading (grader) 78
Building Construction (generator, welder / torch) 69
Paving (concrete mixer truck, paver) 74
Notes: Leq = equivalent continuous sound level (time-averaged sound level); dBA = A-weighted decibel.
As presented in Table 9, the estimated construction noise levels are predicted to be as high as 78 dBA Leq
over an eight-hour period at the nearest existing residences (as close as 25 feet away) when grading
activities take place near the project site boundary. Therefore, under these conditions, the predicted eight-
hour Leq value would not be compliant with the City’s threshold for construction noise and need mitigation
MM-NOI-1. With implementation of MM-NOI-1, impacts would be reduced to being less than significant.
The Basins
Bio-retention basins are scattered throughout the project site. Construction of these basins would involve
site preparation and grading activities as close as 15 feet away from noise sensitive receptors. Estimated
noise levels from the construction phases were calculated for the nearest noise-sensitive land use, as presented
in Table 10. The detailed RCNM input and output values are provided in Appendix B.
Table 10. Construction Noise Modeling Summary Results – The Basins
Construction Phase (expected equipment types)
Estimated 8-hour Leq (dBA)
(at nearest distance per Table
2)
Site Preparation (backhoe, backehoe, front-end loader) 85
Grading (excavator, grader, scraper) 85
Notes: Leq = equivalent continuous sound level (time-averaged sound level); dBA = A-weighted decibel.
NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE FARM IN POWAY PROJECT
11872
23 February 2020
As presented in Table 10, the estimated construction noise levels are predicted to be as high as 85 dBA
equivalent continuous sound level (Leq) over an 8-hour period at the nearest existing residences (as close
as 15 feet away) when grading activities take place near the project boundary. Note that these estimated
noise levels at a source-to-receiver distance of 15 feet would only occur when the single loudest piece of
heavy equipment is operating along the project boundary for a cumulative period of up to 0.75 hours a day.
By way of example, the grader might make multiple passes on site that are this close to the receiver; but,
for the remaining time during the day, the grader is sufficiently farther away—performing work at a more
distant location or simply not operating. When the entire assemblage of equipment is working right at the
edge of the construction zone in each phase, within 15 feet of existing residences, construction noise levels
are anticipated to reach up to 85 dBA Leq. Assuming relatively steady work, this would result in an
exceedance of the City of Poway construction noise limit of 75 dBA Leq8h. In order to avoid potentially
significant construction noise impacts upon existing residences in the project vicinity, mitigation measure
MM-NOI-1 shall be implemented as indicated site conditions may warrant. Proper application of temporary
noise barriers or comparable sound abatement that may arise as a result of MM-NOI-1 implementation has
the ability to realize a 10 dB reduction in noise levels that would correspondingly reduce the predicted 85
dBA eight-hour Leq for the grading phase to a level of 75 dBA Leq and thus compliant with the 75 dBA
threshold. With implementation of MM-NOI-1, impacts would be reduced to being less than significant.
Residential Land Use Districts
New Residential Homes
The proposed project would allow for up to 160 single-family homes to be built around the project site.
Construction activities during this component could occur within 50 feet of the nearest sensitive receiver.
Estimated noise levels from the major construction phases were calculated for the nearest noise-sensitive land
use, as presented in Table 11.
Table 11. Construction Noise Modeling Summary Results – New Homes
Construction Phase (expected equipment types)
Estimated 8-hour Leq (dBA)
(at nearest distance per
Table 2)
Demolition (dozer, excavator, concrete saw) 74
Site Preparation (backhoe, front-end loader) 75
Grading (excavator, grader, scraper) 75
Building Construction (crane, man-lift, generator, backhoe, welder) 64
Paving (concrete mixer truck, backhoe, air compressor, paver, roller) 74
Architectural Coating (air compressor) 59
Notes: Leq = equivalent continuous sound level (time-averaged sound level); dBA = A-weighted decibel.
As presented in Table 11, the estimated construction noise levels are predicted to be as high as 75 dBA
equivalent continuous sound level (Leq) over an 8-hour period at the nearest existing residences (as close
as 50 feet away) when grading activities take place near the project boundary. Distances to the nearest
noise-sensitive receiver are greater, as shown in Table 3, for activities such as demolition and building
construction and therefore yield lower 8-hour predicted noise levels. Note that these estimated construction
noise levels at a source-to-receiver distance of 50 feet include consideration of limited operation duration
of specific anticipated equipment as detailed in Appendix B. By way of example, a grader might make one
NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE FARM IN POWAY PROJECT
11872
24 February 2020
or more passes on site that are this close to the receiver; but, for the remaining time during the day, the
grader is sufficiently farther away—performing work at a more distant location or simply not operating.
Therefore, under these conditions, short-term construction noise would be less than significant.
Private Street “B”
The proposed project’s internal street network would consist of all private roadways in which construction
would involve site preparation, grading, and paving. Construction activities involved with Private Street “B”
near the southern boundary of the property could occur as close as approximately 36 feet away from
sensitive noise receptors. Estimated noise levels from the major construction phases associated with Private
Street “B” were calculated for the nearest noise-sensitive land use, as presented in Table 12.
Table 12. Construction Noise Modeling Summary Results – Private Street
Construction Phase (expected equipment types)
Estimated 8-hour Leq (dBA)
(at nearest distance per
Table 2)
Site Preparation (backhoe, dozer, front-end loader) 78
Grading (excavator, grader, scraper) 78
Paving (paver, roller, other equipment > 5 HP) 77
Notes: Leq = equivalent continuous sound level (time-averaged sound level); dBA = A-weighted decibel.
As presented in Table 12, the estimated construction noise levels are predicted to be as high as 78 dBA
equivalent continuous sound level (Leq) over an 8-hour period at the nearest existing residences (as close
as 36 feet away) when grading activities take place near the project boundary. Note that these estimated
noise levels at a source-to-receiver distance of 36 feet would only occur when the single loudest piece of
heavy equipment is operating along the project boundary for a cumulative period of up to 0.75 hours a day.
By way of example, the grader would make multiple passes on site that are this close to the receiver; but,
for the remaining time during the day, the grader is sufficiently farther away—performing work at a more
distant location or simply not operating. When the entire assemblage of equipment is working right at the
edge of the construction zone in each phase, within 36 feet of existing residences, construction noise levels
are anticipated to reach up to 78 dBA Leq. Assuming relatively steady work, this would result in an
exceedance of the City of Poway construction noise limit of 75 dBA Leq over an eight-hour period.
Although nearby off-site residences would be exposed to elevated construction noise levels, the increased
noise levels would typically be relatively short term. It is anticipated that construction activities associated
with the proposed project would take place primarily within the allowable hours of the City of Poway (7:00
a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday). In the event that construction is required to extend beyond
these times, extended hours permits would be required and would be obtained by the applicant.
If work were to occur outside of the allowable hours, annoyance or sleep disturbance could result
from construction noise; also, due to the relatively limited distance to existing adjacent residences,
construction noise annoyance could result even during daytime hours.
In order to avoid potentially significant construction noise impacts upon existing residences in the project
vicinity, mitigation measure MM-NOI-1 shall be implemented as indicated site conditions may warrant.
Proper application of temporary noise barriers or comparable sound abatement that may arise as a result
NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE FARM IN POWAY PROJECT
11872
25 February 2020
of MM-NOI-1 implementation has the ability to realize a 10 dB reduction in noise levels that would
correspondingly reduce the predicted 78 dBA eight-hour Leq for the grading phase to a level of 75 dBA Leq
and thus compliant with the 75 dBA threshold. With implementation of MM-NOI-1, impacts would be
reduced to being less than significant.
Blasting
Blasting operations would be required for site preparation. Rock blasting is the controlled use of explosives
to excavate, break down, or remove rock. The result of rock blasting is often known as a rock cut. The most
commonly used explosives today are ammonium nitrate/fuel oil-based blends, due to their lower cost
compared to dynamite.
No more than five (5) blasts, of up to 1.2 tons of explosive each, per day would occur during construction
activities. Blasting would only be required where existing topography or geologic conditions require blasting
to be conducted, and for purposes of this analysis would be no closer to an existing residential receptor
than 400 feet. This analysis also assumes a per-delay charge weight of up to 18.5 pounds that is heavily
confined prior to the blast event per industry guidance (Dyno Nobel 2010). With all the delayed charges
detonated in succession, the A-weighted hourly Leq is estimated to be 82.2 dBA per blast. For all five blasts
occurring within the same 8-hour period, the Leq would be 80 dBA and exceed the City of Poway’s
construction noise threshold by 5 dBA; hence blasting noise would result in a potentially significant impact
and effective implementation of mitigation measure MM-NOI-2 would be required.
Blasting involves drilling a series of boreholes and placing explosives in each hole. By limiting the amount
of explosives in each hole, the blasting contractor can limit the total energy released at any single time,
which in turn can reduce noise and vibration levels. Rock drilling generates impulsive noise from the striking
of the hammer with the anvil within the drill body, which drives the drill bit into the rock. Rock drilling
generates noise levels of approximately 81 dB Lmax (maximum sound level during the measurement
interval) at a distance of 50 feet (FHWA 2006). Given a typical work cycle, this would equate to 74 dBA Leq
at 50 feet. At a distance of 400 feet, consistent with the distance blast-to-receptor distance value, the drill
noise would be 56 dBA Leq over an 8-hour period and thus compliant with the City’s construction noise limit.
Long-Term Operational
Off-Site Traffic Noise Exposure
Less-Than-Significant Impact. The proposed project would result in the creation of additional vehicle trips on local
arterial roadways (i.e., Espola Road), which could result in increased traffic noise levels at adjacent noise-sensitive
land uses. Appendix C, Traffic Noise Modeling Input and Output, contains a spreadsheet with traffic volume data
(average daily traffic) for Espola Road. In particular, the proposed project would create additional traffic along
Espola Road, which according to the Traffic Impact Assessment prepared for the proposed project (LOS Engineering
Inc. 2019) would add 2938 total average daily trips to adjacent to the project site.
According to Caltrans, a three-dBA change in sound is the beginning at which humans generally notice a
barely perceptible change in sound, a five-dBA change is generally readily perceptible, and a 10-dBA
increase is perceived by most people as a doubling of the existing noise level (Caltrans 2013a). Due to the
existing and proposed urban setting of the project area, a readily perceptible change in noise (five dBA)
would be the appropriate threshold to determine significant increases in traffic noise.
NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE FARM IN POWAY PROJECT
11872
26 February 2020
Potential noise effects from vehicular traffic were assessed using the Federal Highway Administration’s
Traffic Noise Model version 2.5 (FHWA 2004). Information used in the model included the roadway
geometry, existing (year 2019), near-term (opening day), near-term (opening day) plus project, horizon year
(2035) without project, and horizon year (2035) plus project traffic volumes and posted traffic speeds.
Noise levels were modeled at representative noise-sensitive receivers ST1 through ST4, as shown in Figure
3. The receivers were modeled to be 5 feet above the local ground elevation. The noise model results are
summarized in Table 13. Based on results of the model, implementation of the proposed project would not
result in readily perceptible increases in traffic noise.
Table 13. Traffic Noise Modeling Results
Modeled
Receiver No.
Existing
(2019) Noise
Level
(dBA CNEL)
Near-Term
(Opening
Day) without
Project Noise
Level
(dBA CNEL)
Near-Term
(Opening
Day) with
Project Noise
Level
(dBA CNEL)
Horizon Year
(2035)
without
Project Noise
Level
(dBA CNEL)
Horizon Year
(2035) with
Project Noise
Level
(dBA CNEL)
Maximum
Project-
Related
Noise Level
Increase
(dB)
ST1 65.7 65.9 66.2 66.9 67.1 0.3
ST2 41.0 41.1 44.1 41.4 44.3 3.0
ST3 52.5 52.6 52.7 52.8 52.8 0.1
ST4 47.8 48.0 50.1 48.3 50.2 2.1
Source: Appendix H.
Notes: dBA = A-weighted decibel; CNEL = community noise equivalent level; dB = decibel.
Table 13 shows that at all four listed representative receivers, the addition of proposed project traffic to the
roadway network would result in an increase in the CNEL of less than 3 dB, which is below the discernible
level of change for the average healthy human ear. Thus, a less-than-significant impact is expected for
proposed project-related off-site traffic noise increases affecting existing residences in the vicinity.
On-site Traffic Interior Noise Exposure
The City and the state require that interior noise levels not exceed a CNEL of 45 dB within residences.
Typically, with the windows open, building shells provide approximately 15 dB of noise reduction; with
windows closed, residential construction generally provides a minimum of 25 dB attenuation. Therefore,
rooms exposed to an exterior CNEL not greater than 60 dB would result in an interior CNEL of 45 dB or less
even with windows open. But when exterior CNEL values range from 60-70 dBA, the windows would need
to be closed and thus require that the occupied structure feature mechanical ventilation for interior comfort.
The future exterior noise levels in Table 14 are calculated at modeled positions M1, M2, and M3 on Figure
3 corresponding with the facades of three sample proposed new homes on southern-most “Cottage” lots
parallel with Espola Road. Consequently, interior noise levels within these future residences on the
proposed project site would be expected to achieve compliance with the interior noise criterion of 45 dBA
CNEL by employing standard residential construction techniques and materials.
NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE FARM IN POWAY PROJECT
11872
27 February 2020
Table 14. Future Ambient Noise Levels at Residential Facades
Receptor Location Noise Source Distance from Roadway CNEL
Backyard, Espola Road West Espola Road 150 feet 59
Backyard, Espola Road Center Espola Road 150 feet 59
Backyard, Espola Road East Espola Road/Private Street “A” 150 feet 59
Traffic noise results displayed in Table 14 indicate that future traffic noise exposure levels at the closest
building facades would all be well under the maximum exterior noise level for single-family residences (70
CNEL dBA) within the Specific Plan area and would also result in an interior CNEL of 45 dB or less, even
with the windows open (i.e., 59 dBA CNEL minus 15 dBA = 44 dBA CNEL). Therefore, future roadway traffic
noise levels at residences would be less than significant.
Stationary Noise Sources
The proposed project’s development would result in 160 new single-family homes and a mix of open space
and recreational uses (see Figure 2) that would add a variety of noise-producing mechanical equipment
(discussed below). Most of the noise-producing equipment would be considered stationary, or limited in
mobility to a defined area. Additionally, the open space and recreational uses would attract participants
and their guests (or in some situations, such activities would be open to the public) to enjoy proposed
project facilities and thus create potential community noise relating to added aggregate speech and music
(both acoustic and amplified) as appropriate or expected for the venue.
The Club
Less-Than-Significant Impact. The Club is anticipated to feature a family swimming pool, yoga pavilion,
locker rooms, and outdoor tennis and pickle ball courts. These facilities suggest regular, continuous
operation of pool filtration pumps and air-conditioning units for the occupied interior spaces that should be
no closer than 150 feet to the nearest existing noise-sensitive residential property to the west. At this
distance, the combined noise level of a typical operating pump (assume source level of 80 dBA Leq at three
feet [Bies and Hansen 1996]) and a commercial rooftop condenser unit (source level of 74 dBA at three
feet [Johnson Controls 2010]) would be 47 dBA Leq, which translates to 54 dBA CNEL (assuming continuous
operation of equipment through nighttime hours, to keep the pool clean and the Club interior climate-
controlled) and thus less than the 60 dBA CNEL standard at the exterior boundaries of the project area.
Residents and their guests enjoying the outdoor pool and ball courts during daytime hours would likely raise
their voices while doing so. For purposes of this analysis, up to 100 participants (44 at the ball courts, and
another 56 in or at the pool area) with individual speech levels of 66 dBA at three feet (Hayne et al. 2006)
recreating outdoors at an average distance of 150 feet from the nearest noise-sensitive receptor to the
west would result in an aggregate hourly sound level of 52 dBA Leq, which translates to 52 dBA CNEL
(assuming no operation during nighttime hours) and thus less than the 60 dBA CNEL standard at the
exterior boundaries of the project area.
Anticipated noise due to pickle ball play from a single court is estimated to be 54 dBA Leq at a distance of
80 feet, based on prior Dudek project experience and generally consistent with measurement data from
publicly available sources (Spendiarian and Willis 2012). Assuming up to eight pickle ball courts, on
NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE FARM IN POWAY PROJECT
11872
28 February 2020
average, would experience concurrent play from residents, guests, and visitors, the predicted noise
exposure at the nearest existing residential receiver to the west (at a distance of 150 feet, representing the
average distance if pickle ball play was considered as a single-point source) would be 55 dBA, which
translates to 55 dBA CNEL (assuming no play during nighttime hours) and thus less than the 60 dBA CNEL
standard at the exterior boundaries of the project area.
In aggregate, sound from these three sources (operation of mechanical equipment, speech from Club
attendance, and pickle ball play) would logarithmically combine into an hourly level of 57 dBA Leq, which
translates into 58 dBA CNEL and thus less than the 60 dBA CNEL standard at the western boundary
adjoining offsite residences.
The Butterfly Farm
Less-Than-Significant Impact. The Butterfly Farm is expected to include a butterfly vivarium, greenhouse,
classroom, and associated office/maintenance support space. These facilities would involve ventilation
and air-conditioning units that should be no closer than 350 feet to the nearest existing noise-sensitive
residential property to the east. At this distance, the combined noise level of a typical axial-flow “box”-type
ventilation fan (84 dBA Leq at three feet, calculated from 22,575 cubic feet per minute [cfm] [Farmtek
2019]) and a commercial rooftop condenser unit (source level of 74 dBA at three feet [Johnson Controls
2010]) would be 43 dBA Leq, which translates to 50 dBA CNEL (assuming 24-hour operation as a worst-
case) and thus less than the 60 dBA CNEL standard at the exterior boundaries of the project area. Hence,
noise impact from operation of these equipment serving the facilities at the Butterfly Farm would be
considered less than significant.
Residents and their guests enjoying the outdoor garden and picnic area during daytime hours would likely raise
their voices while doing so. For purposes of this analysis, up to 50 participants with individual speech levels of 66
dBA at three feet (Hayne 2006) recreating outdoors at an average distance of 400 feet from the nearest noise-
sensitive receptor to the east would result in an aggregate hourly sound level of 38 dBA Leq, which translates to 40
dBA CNEL (assuming no operation during nighttime hours) and thus less than the 60 dBA CNEL standard at the
exterior boundaries of the project area. Hence, noise impact attributed to residents and guests enjoying the
facilities at the Butterfly Farm would be considered less than significant.
The Barn and The Social
Less-Than-Significant Impact with Mitigation. The Event Barn and the “The Social” café—included in The
Barn component of the proposed project—would be located northeast of the proposed project entrance
across from Martincoit Road. These locations would be used as venues for weekday and weekend
weddings, farmer’s markets, concerts, fairs, and other hosted private and public gatherings. The two
detached structures would be expected to feature HVAC systems (to provide ventilation and air-conditioning
for interior spaces) functionally similar to those assumed for the Butterfly Farm. However, the nearest
existing residential receptor to this operating equipment would likely be south of Espola Road,
approximately 200 feet away. At this distance, the estimated aggregate HVAC equipment noise level would
be 48 dBA Leq, which translates to 55 dBA CNEL (assuming 24-hour operation as a worst-case) and thus
less than the 60 dBA CNEL standard at the exterior boundaries of the project area. Hence, noise impact
from operation of these equipment serving the facilities at The Event Barn and The Social would be less
than significant.
NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE FARM IN POWAY PROJECT
11872
29 February 2020
According to the Specific Plan, the hosted events would not normally last beyond 10 p.m., and any that do
would require a Special Use Permit per 3.2.3.B of the Specific Plan Additional Open Space Standards (SMA
Ventures LLC 2019). The number of participants at hosted events could be as high as 300, and this analysis
assumes that individual average speech levels of up to 66 dBA at three feet (Hayne 2006) could occur. To
help illustrate a sample outdoor event noise scenario, Appendix D shows the predicted noise propagation
out to the community from the following assumed sound sources and sound-blocking features:
Two (2) pole-mounted outdoor speaker systems, each six (6) feet in height above grade, are
positioned at the southwest and southeast corners of The Barn and each emit an average sound
level of up to 100 dBA Leq at a distance of approximately 10 feet, comparable to an amplified guitar
(on stage with the performer using ear monitors [Darling n.d.]).
An attendance of 300, with individual speech level at 66 dBA Leq at three feet each, is distributed
south of the buildings’ southern facades and over the event lawn north of the proposed curved
Event Barn Lawn wall.
The Event Barn Lawn wall, a stone barrier topped with glass panels and having an extent shown in
the Specific Plan, is assumed to be eight feet in height above grade.
Under these assumed conditions, predicted dominant noise from the pair of speakers operating during a
“regular event” (per 3.2.3.B of the Specific Plan Additional Open Space Standards) would cause sound
levels at the nearest noise-sensitive receptor (an existing residential property on the south side of Espola
Road, just 180 feet away from the Event Barn Lawn wall) to reach up to 69 dBA hourly Leq. At this estimated
sound level, a regular 3-hour event could transpire during the allowable daytime hours (9 a.m. to 3 p.m. on
any weekday [except holidays]) and still result in a CNEL value compliant with the 60 dBA CNEL standard
and thus represent a less-than-significant noise impact to the community. If the 3-hour event were to occur
during evening hours (i.e., between 7 p.m. and 10 p.m.), the resulting CNEL at the same existing offsite
receptor would be 65 dBA CNEL and thus need a 5 dB reduction at each of the two speakers in order to
comply with the 60 dBA CNEL offsite standard.
At the nearest proposed on-site residential lot to the west of the Barn, approximately 120 feet away, the
sound exposure from the 3-hour regular event during daytime hours would be as high as 74 dBA hourly Leq
at a second-story listener position—a receptor location, such as a bedroom window, at the end of a direct
sound path that may not be occluded by the Barn wall. At this magnitude during daytime hours, the resulting
CNEL value would be 65 dBA; and, for an evening event, the CNEL would be 60 dBA. Both of these predicted
on-site residential façade levels are compliant with the 70 dBA CNEL limit per the Specific Plan.
During “special events” (per 3.2.3.B of the Specific Plan Additional Open Space Standards) requiring a
temporary permit that could occur during nighttime hours and/or last for more than 3 hours duration, the
same two speakers (at 100 dBA at 10’ each) and speech from 50-300 guests would risk exceeding the
offsite receptor standard of 60 dBA CNEL and require mitigation. For example, a 3-hour special event
hosted between 10 p.m. and 1 a.m. would result in 70 dBA CNEL at the nearest existing residence south
of Espola Road; thus, compliance during such nighttime hours would require that the two speakers have
their amplified sound levels reduced by 10 dBA each. At the resulting 90 dBA at 10’ per speaker, the scale
and type of event would likely need to be different: 100 dBA at 10’ would be consistent with an amplified
guitar, but 90 dBA at 10’ would be compatible with live, unamplified vocalists or a playing classical
instruments (e.g., four-piece band). Given such considerations, a variety of special event possibilities could
NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE FARM IN POWAY PROJECT
11872
30 February 2020
risk exceeding the 60 dBA CNEL offsite standard and/or the on-site residential outdoor limit of 70 dBA
CNEL and thus result in a potentially significant impact requiring mitigation measure MM-NOI-3.
The Meadow
Less-Than-Significant Impact with Mitigation. According to the Specific Plan, outdoor concerts may be
performed at The Meadow area, which is bounded by a planned on-site slope and open space to the north,
Private Street “D” to the south, Private Street “A” to the west, and new residential lots to the east. Similar
to the sample event modeled for the Barn and Social venue, Appendix D shows the predicted noise
propagation out to the community from the following assumed sound sources and sound-blocking features:
Two (2) pole-mounted outdoor speaker systems, each six (6) feet in height above grade, are
positioned at the southwest and southeast corners of The Barn and each emit an average sound
level of up to 94 dBA Leq at a distance of approximately 10 feet, comparable to an amplified guitar
(on stage with the performer using ear monitors [Darling n.d.]).
An attendance of 300, with individual speech level at 66 dBA Leq at three feet each, is distributed
south of the buildings’ southern facades and over the event lawn north of the proposed curved
Event Barn Lawn wall.
The Event Barn Lawn wall, a stone barrier topped with glass panels and having an extent shown in
the Specific Plan, is assumed to be eight feet in height above grade.
Under these assumed conditions, predicted dominant noise from the pair of speakers operating during a
“regular event” would cause sound levels at the nearest noise-sensitive receptor (an existing residential
property 100 feet south of the Meadow beyond Private Street “D”) to attain 64 dBA Leq. At this estimated
sound level, a regular event could transpire for up to three hours during the daytime period and result in a
CNEL value of 55 dBA. A similar regular event during evening hours would yield a CNEL value of 60 dBA.
Both CNEL values would be compliant with the 60 dBA CNEL standard at the exterior boundaries of the
project area and thus represent a less-than-significant noise impact to the neighboring offsite community.
At the nearest proposed on-site residential lot easterly adjacent to the Meadow, the sound exposure from
the event would be as high as 72 dBA Leq at a second-story listener position. At this magnitude, the same
regular event during daytime hours would be 63 dBA CNEL. In the evening, a comparable 3-hour event
would yield 68 dBA CNEL at the same second-story receptor. Both values are less than 70 dBA CNEL limit
per the Specific Plan for on-site residential use boundaries.
During “special events” (per 3.2.3.B of the Specific Plan Additional Open Space Standards), the aggregate
sound from live or amplified music from a well-attended event at the Meadow venue could occur during
nighttime hours. Using the same sample event scenario conditions as described for regular events, a 3-
hour special event at night would not meet the 60 dBA CNEL off-site threshold at the edge of existing
residential land use 100 feet south of the Meadow. By way of example, the CNEL at the nearest offsite
residence would be 65 dBA and thus require at least 5 dB of sound reduction at each of the two speakers.
Given such considerations, a variety of special event possibilities could risk exceeding the 60 dBA CNEL
offsite standard and/or the on-site residential outdoor limit of 70 dBA CNEL and thus result in a potentially
significant impact requiring mitigation measure MM-NOI-4.
NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE FARM IN POWAY PROJECT
11872
31 February 2020
Agri-Fields (The Working Farm)
Less-Than-Significant Impact. The Working Farm would be expected to involve typical agricultural
equipment operating as close as 60 feet to adjacent residential property. At this distance, noise levels could
range from 55 dBA Lmax for a pickup truck and up to 84 dBA Lmax for a tractor (FHWA 2006). However,
Section 8.08.170.E from the City’s noise ordinance exempts agricultural operations so long as they occur
during daytime hours (7 a.m. to 7 p.m.) or are performed for crop protection (City of Poway 2019). But to
yield noise exposure levels at the adjoining offsite residential properties that meet the Specific Plan’s
exterior project area property line standard of 60 dBA CNEL, hours of operation for the noisiest on-site
expected equipment would need to be limited. By way of example, a tractor could operate for up to 2 hours
(during the aforementioned allowable daytime period) at an average working distance of no less than 150
feet from a receptor point along the exterior project area property line and result in a noise level less than
60 dBA CNEL. Quieter equipment, such as a flatbed truck (Lmax = 74 dBA at 50 feet), could operate for all
twelve daytime hours at this same average working distance and yield a noise level compliant with this
adopted standard.
The Dog Park
The Dog Park is a designated area southwest of the Meadow and approximately 150 feet north of the
nearest offsite existing residence abutting Cloudcroft Court. Assuming up to four dogs may be barking (each
bark considered comparable to 100 dBA Lmax at one meter [Helmut 2019]) intermittently (no more than
twelve barks each per hour) during a typical daytime hour when the area would be available for usage, at
this distance of 150 feet to the Specific Plan boundary the estimated CNEL would be less than 45 dBA and
thus compliant with the offsite residential property line standard.
The Tot Lot
The Tot Lot is a designated area north of the Butterfly Farm and approximately 150 feet south-southeast of the
nearest offsite existing residence abutting St. Andrews Drive. Assuming up to eight (8) children may be yelling
during excited play (each yell considered comparable to a human shout [90 dBA Lmax at three feet, per Hayne
2006]) intermittently (no more than twelve shouts each per hour) during a typical daytime hour when the area
would be available for usage, at this distance of 150 feet to the Specific Plan boundary the estimated CNEL
would be less than 40 dBA and thus compliant with the offsite residential property line standard.
For two on-site future residential “Cottage” lots that adjoin the Tot Lot to the southwest, the playing children
would be much closer—potentially 50 feet, on average. At this time-averaged distance, the yelling children
would result in a noise level of 48 dBA CNEL and thus be compliant with the Specific Plan performance
standard of 70 dBA CNEL.
NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE FARM IN POWAY PROJECT
11872
32 February 2020
New Residential Homes
Less-Than-Significant Impact. For purposes of this analysis, each of the 160 new single-family homes would be
expected to feature an air-conditioning unit having operation noise comparable to 60 dBA at twenty feet (Berger
et al 2015). Assuming these units are installed at grade and near a façade of the residence, they should be no
closer than 50 feet to the nearest existing residential property and would thus be expected to yield—as a worst-
case—a property line noise level of 52 dBA Leq continuously throughout the day and night during hot summer
conditions. At this hourly level, the corresponding CNEL value would be 59 dBA and less than the Specific Plan’s
60 dBA CNEL standard at the exterior boundaries of the project area. Therefore, operation of residential air-
conditioning units would result in potential noise impacts considered less than significant.
b) Would the project result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
Construction activities may expose persons to excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise,
causing a potentially significant impact. Caltrans has collected groundborne vibration information related
to construction activities (Caltrans 2013b). Information from Caltrans indicates that continuous vibrations
with a PPV of approximately 0.2 ips is considered “annoying.” For context, heavier pieces of construction
equipment, such as a bulldozer that may be expected on the project site, have peak particle velocities of
approximately 0.089 ips or less at a reference distance of 25 feet (DOT 2006).
Groundborne vibration attenuates rapidly—even over short distances. And when groundborne vibration
encounters a building foundation, a coupling loss occurs depending on the mass and design. For typical
wood-framed houses, like those near the proposed project, this coupling loss is 5 vibration velocity decibels
according to FTA guidance (FTA 2006). The attenuation of groundborne vibration as it propagates from
source to receptor through intervening soils and rock strata can be estimated with expressions found in
FTA and Caltrans guidance. By way of example, for a bulldozer operating on site and as close as the western
project boundary (that is 15 feet from the nearest receiving sensitive land use) the estimated vibration
velocity level would be 0.19 ips and thus no greater than the annoyance threshold recommended by
Caltrans. Therefore, vibration-induced annoyance to occupants of nearby existing homes would be less
than significant.
Construction vibration, at sufficiently high levels, can also present a building damage risk. However, anticipated
construction vibration from conventional heavy equipment associated with this proposed project would not yield
levels that surpass this risk. Per Caltrans, the recommended PPV threshold for newer residential structures is
0.5 ips and 0.3 ips for older residential structures—both of which are less stringent that the aforementioned
threshold to annoy occupants of such structures; thus vibration damage risk to nearby structures is considered
less than significant.
For blasting events associated with project construction, Caltrans offers different “transient event” guidance:
0.5 ips PPV for “repeated” blasts where the class of receiving structure would be comparable to “relatively old
residential structures in poor condition” (Caltrans 2013b). Detonation of an 18.5-pound, heavily confined per-
delay charge would be predicted to result in a groundborne vibration velocity level of 0.5 ips PPV at a residential
receptor no closer than 400 feet away.
NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE FARM IN POWAY PROJECT
11872
33 February 2020
Once operational, the proposed project would not be expected to feature major producers of groundborne
vibration. Anticipated mechanical systems like heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning units are designed
and manufactured to feature rotating (fans, motors) and reciprocating (compressors) components that are
well-balanced with isolated vibration within or external to the equipment casings. On this basis, vibration
due to proposed project operation should be less than significant.
C. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan
has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
Less-Than-Significant Impact. There are no private airstrips within the vicinity of the project site. The
closest airport to the proposed project site is the Ramona Municipal Airport, approximately 6.25 miles
northeast of the site and would therefore not expose people residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels. Impacts would be less than significant.
NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE FARM IN POWAY PROJECT
11872
34 February 2020
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
11872
35 February 2020
6 Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures would be implemented to reduce potentially significant impacts to less
than significant.
MM-NOI-1 Prior to the issuance of a Construction Permit, the project applicant/owner or construction
contractor shall prepare and submit to the City of Poway Planning Division for its review and
approval a Construction Noise Management Plan (CNMP). Prior to the issuance of a Construction
Permit, construction plans shall also include a note indicating compliance with the CNMP is
required. The CNMP shall be prepared or reviewed by a qualified acoustician (retained at the
project applicant/owner or construction contractor’s expense) and feature the following:
1) A detailed construction schedule, at daily (or weekly, if activities during each day of the week
are typical) resolution and correlating to areas or zones of on-site project construction activities
and the anticipated equipment types and quantities involved. Information shall include
expected hours of actual operation per day for each type of equipment per phase and indication
of anticipated concurrent construction activities on site.
2) Suggested locations of a set of noise-level monitors, attended by a qualified acoustician or
another party under his/her supervision or direction, at which sample outdoor ambient noise
levels will be measured and collected over a sufficient sample period and subsequently analyzed
(i.e., compared with applicable time-dependent A-weighted decibel [dBA] thresholds) to ascertain
compliance with the eight-hour City of Poway threshold of 75 dBA equivalent noise level over a
consecutive eight-hour period. Sampling shall be performed, at a minimum, on the first (or
otherwise considered typical construction operations) day of each distinct construction phase
(e.g., each of the five listed phases in Table 2, Construction Phase Distance to Nearest Pre-
Existing Noise-Sensitive Receptors).
3) If sample collected noise level data indicates that the eight-hour noise threshold has or will be
exceeded, construction work shall be suspended (for the activity or phase of concern) and the
project applicant/owner or construction contractor shall implement one or more of the following
measures as detailed or specified in the CNMP:
a) Administrative controls (e.g., reduce operating time of equipment and/or prohibit usage of
equipment type[s] within certain distances).
b) Engineering controls (upgrade noise controls, such as install better engine exhaust mufflers).
c) Install noise abatement on the project site boundary fencing (or within the project site, as
practical and appropriate) in the form of sound blankets or comparable temporary barriers
to occlude construction noise emission between the project site (or specific equipment
operation as the situation may define) and the noise-sensitive receptor(s) of concern.
The implemented measure(s) shall be reviewed or otherwise inspected and approved by the
qualified acoustician (or another party under his/her supervision or direction) prior to
resumption of the construction activity or process that caused the measured noise concern or
need for noise mitigation. Noise levels shall be re-measured, after installation of said
measures, to ascertain post-mitigation compliance with the noise threshold. As needed, this
process shall be repeated and refined until noise level compliance is demonstrated and
NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE FARM IN POWAY PROJECT
11872
36 February 2020
documented. A report of this implemented mitigation and its documented success shall be
provided to the City of Poway Planning Division.
4) The project applicant/owner or construction contractor shall make available a telephone hotline
so that concerned neighbors in the community may call to report noise complaints. The CNMP shall
include a process to investigate these complaints and, if determined to be valid, detail efforts to
provide a timely resolution and response to the complainant—with copy of resolution provided to
the City of Poway Planning Division.
MM-NOI-2 The project applicant/owner or its construction contractor(s) shall prepare, or cause to be
prepared, a blasting/drilling monitoring plan. The plan shall be site specific, based on general and
exact locations of required blasting and the results of a project-specific geotechnical investigation.
The blasting plan will include a description of the planned blasting methods, an inventory of
receptors potentially affected by the planned blasting, and calculations to determine the area
affected by the planned blasting that include estimates of the pre-blast drill noise levels, air-blast
overpressure sound levels, and groundborne vibration levels at each residence within 500 feet of
a blasting location. Where potential exceedances of relevant noise and vibration exposure limits
are identified, the blasting/drilling monitoring plan shall identify mitigation measures shown to
effectively reduce noise and vibration levels (e.g., altering orientation of blast progression,
increased delay between charge detonations, pre-splitting) to be implemented in order to
demonstrate compliance with these thresholds. Additionally, all project phases involving blasting
shall conform to the following requirements:
1. All blasting shall be performed by a blast contractor and blasting personnel licensed to operate
per appropriate regulatory agencies.
2. Prior to blasting, a qualified geotechnical professional shall inspect and document the existing
conditions of facades and other visible structural features or elements of the nearest
residential buildings. Should this inspector determine that some structural features or
elements appear fragile or otherwise potentially sensitive to vibration damage caused by the
anticipated blasting activity, the maximum per-delay charge weights and other related blast
parameters shall be re-evaluated to establish appropriate quantified limits.
3. Each blast shall be monitored and recorded with an air-blast overpressure monitor and
groundborne vibration accelerometer that is located outside the closest residence to the blast.
This data shall be recorded, and a post-blast summary report shall be prepared and be
available for public review or distribution as necessary.
4. Blasting shall not exceed 0.5 ips PPV at the nearest occupied residence, in accordance with
California Department of Transportation guidance (Caltrans 2013b).
5. To ensure that potentially impacted residents are informed, the applicant will provide notice by
mail to all property owners within 1,000 feet of the project at least one (1) week prior to a
scheduled blasting event.
6. Pre-blast drilling operations associated with blasting preparations shall be performed in a
manner consistent with adherence to City of Poway regulations and guidance.
NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE FARM IN POWAY PROJECT
11872
37 February 2020
MM-NOI-3 Operation of any “regular event” at The Event Barn (and The Social) as defined by 3.2.3.B of The
Farm in Poway Specific Plan Additional Open Space Standards shall conform to the following
acoustical conditions:
1) Daytime (within 8 a.m. to 7 p.m.)
a) Attendance shall not exceed 300 and include residents, guests, visitors, and any on-site
support staff that host the event in progress.
b) Event duration shall not exceed a cumulative total of three hours.
c) The aggregate sound level from live (acoustic) or amplified music shall not exceed a total of
103 A-weighted decibel (dBA) at a distance of 10 feet. If speakers are positioned to distribute
the amplified sound, they must be positioned in such a manner that The Event Barn Wall
provides linear occlusion between the speaker and the nearest existing residential receptors
south of Espola Road.
d) If any proposed event parameters above are not listed or may exceed the indicated
constraints, then a qualified acoustician shall prepare or review a predictive sound
propagation analysis prior to the proposed event in order to identify need for
recommended noise control or sound abatement implantation measures that could
include (but not be limited to):
i. Via the pre-installed house audio-visual (A/V) system or on A/V hardware supplied by the
hosted event performers, set electronic controls on amplified sound levels to comply with
recommended front-of-stage and/or property line expectations.
ii. Install temporary noise walls, curtains, or other barrier forms so as to improve
containment and absorption of sound within The Event Barn Lawn venue space and
minimize spill-over noise to the property line and community beyond.
iii. Install on-site sound level measurement systems (e.g., akin to NTiAudio or comparable
supplier technology) to monitor event sound levels in real-time and provide alerts to
event hosts and administrators. Collected data and alerts offer opportunity to provide
feedback to event performers as part of implementing administrative control of sound
emission levels.
Collected data from 1.d.iii can also provide documentation that an event was fully compliant
with required sound limits at the property line(s), and might be used to support assertions that
future events having identical conditions (e.g., an annual seasonal festival) would also be
compliant and thus waive the need for additional monitoring (at the discretion or approval of
the City of Poway).
2) Evening (7 p.m. to 10 p.m.)
a) Attendance shall not exceed 300 and include residents, guests, visitors, and any on-site
support staff that host the event in progress.
b) Event duration shall not exceed a cumulative total of three hours.
c) The aggregate sound level from live (acoustic) or amplified music shall not exceed a total of 98
dBA at a distance of 10 feet. If speakers are positioned to distribute the amplified sound, they
must be positioned in such a manner that The Event Barn Wall provides linear occlusion
between the speaker and the nearest existing residential receptors south of Espola Road.
NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE FARM IN POWAY PROJECT
11872
38 February 2020
d) If any proposed event parameters above are not listed or may exceed the indicated
constraints, then a qualified acoustician shall prepare or review a predictive sound
propagation analysis prior to the proposed event in order to identify need for recommended
noise control or sound abatement implantation measures that could include (but not be
limited to):
i. Via the pre-installed house A/V system or on A/V hardware supplied by the hosted event
performers, set electronic controls on amplified sound levels to comply with
recommended front-of-stage and/or property line expectations.
ii. Install temporary noise walls, curtains, or other barrier forms so as to improve
containment and absorption of sound within The Event Barn Lawn venue space and
minimize spill-over noise to the property line and community beyond.
iii. Install on-site sound level measurement systems (e.g., akin to NTiAudio or comparable
supplier technology) to monitor event sound levels in real-time and provide alerts to
event hosts and administrators.
Collected data from 2.d.iii can also provide documentation that an event was fully compliant with
required sound limits at the property line(s), and might be used to support assertions that future
events having identical conditions (e.g., an annual seasonal festival) would also be compliant and
thus waive the need for additional monitoring (at the discretion or approval of the City of Poway).
Conduct of a “special event” (i.e., that is not considered a “regular event”) at The Event Barn (and
The Social) as defined by 3.2.3.B of The Farm in Poway Specific Plan Additional Open Space
Standards shall require a City-approved Temporary Use Permit. At the City’s discretion, the
Temporary Use Permit application may require the approval of a predictive sound propagation
analysis prepared by a qualified acoustician to identify recommended noise control and sound
abatement implementation measures that—as implemented properly by the permit applicant—
would be expected to result in event-attributed noise levels that are compliant with the Farm in
Poway Specific Plan Additional Open Space Standards as follows:
1) No greater than 60 dBA CNEL at the property lines of existing residential receptors adjoining the
Specific Plan area; and,
2) No greater than 70 dBA CNEL at the property lines of on-site residential receptors within the
Specific Plan area.
MM-NOI-4 Operation of any “regular event” at The Meadow (Amphitheater) as defined by 3.2.3.B of The Farm
in Poway Specific Plan Additional Open Space Standards shall conform to the following acoustical
conditions:
1) Daytime (within 8 a.m. to 7 p.m.)
a) Attendance shall not exceed 300 and include residents, guests, visitors, and any on-site
support staff that host the event in progress.
b) Event duration shall not exceed a cumulative total of three hours.
c) The aggregate sound level from live (acoustic) or amplified music shall not exceed a total of
97 A-weighted decibel (dBA) at a distance of 10 feet. If speakers are positioned to distribute
the amplified sound, they must be positioned in such a manner that The Event Barn Wall
NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE FARM IN POWAY PROJECT
11872
39 February 2020
provides linear occlusion between the speaker and the nearest existing residential receptors
south of Espola Road.
d) If any proposed event parameters above are not listed or may exceed the indicated
constraints, then a qualified acoustician shall prepare or review a predictive sound
propagation analysis prior to the proposed event in order to identify need for
recommended noise control or sound abatement implantation measures that could
include (but not be limited to):
i. Via the pre-installed house audio-visual (A/V) system or on A/V hardware supplied by the
hosted event performers, set electronic controls on amplified sound levels to comply with
recommended front-of-stage and/or property line expectations.
ii. Install temporary noise walls, curtains, or other barrier forms so as to improve
containment and absorption of sound within The Event Barn Lawn venue space and
minimize spill-over noise to the property line and community beyond.
iii. Install on-site sound level measurement systems (e.g., akin to NTiAudio or comparable
supplier technology) to monitor event sound levels in real-time and provide alerts to
event hosts and administrators. Collected data and alerts offer opportunity to provide
feedback to event performers as part of implementing administrative control of sound
emission levels.
Collected data from 1.d.iii can also provide documentation that an event was fully compliant
with required sound limits at the property line(s), and might be used to support assertions that
future events having identical conditions (e.g., an annual seasonal festival) would also be
compliant and thus waive the need for additional monitoring (at the discretion or approval of
the City of Poway).
2) Evening (7 p.m. to 10 p.m.)
a) Attendance shall not exceed 300 and include residents, guests, visitors, and any on-site
support staff that host the event in progress.
b) Event duration shall not exceed a cumulative total of three hours.
c) The aggregate sound level from live (acoustic) or amplified music shall not exceed a total of 92
dBA at a distance of 10 feet. If speakers are positioned to distribute the amplified sound, they
must be positioned in such a manner that The Event Barn Wall provides linear occlusion
between the speaker and the nearest existing residential receptors south of Espola Road.
d) If any proposed event parameters above are not listed or may exceed the indicated
constraints, then a qualified acoustician shall prepare or review a predictive sound
propagation analysis prior to the proposed event in order to identify need for recommended
noise control or sound abatement implantation measures that could include (but not be
limited to):
i. Via the pre-installed house A/V system or on A/V hardware supplied by the hosted event
performers, set electronic controls on amplified sound levels to comply with
recommended front-of-stage and/or property line expectations.
ii. Install temporary noise walls, curtains, or other barrier forms so as to improve
containment and absorption of sound within The Event Barn Lawn venue space and
minimize spill-over noise to the property line and community beyond.
NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE FARM IN POWAY PROJECT
11872
40 February 2020
iii. Install on-site sound level measurement systems (e.g., akin to NTiAudio or comparable
supplier technology) to monitor event sound levels in real-time and provide alerts to
event hosts and administrators.
Collected data from 2.d.iii can also provide documentation that an event was fully compliant
with required sound limits at the property line(s), and might be used to support assertions that
future events having identical conditions (e.g., an annual seasonal festival) would also be
compliant and thus waive the need for additional monitoring (at the discretion or approval of
the City of Poway).
Conduct of a “special event” (i.e., that is not considered a “regular event”) at The Meadow as
defined by 3.2.3.B of The Farm in Poway Specific Plan Additional Open Space Standards shall
require a City-approved Temporary Use Permit. At the City’s discretion, the Temporary Use
Permit application may require the approval of a predictive sound propagation analysis
prepared by a qualified acoustician to identify recommended noise control and sound
abatement implementation measures that—as implemented properly by the permit applicant—
would be expected to result in event-attributed noise levels that are compliant with The Farm
in Poway Specific Plan Additional Open Space Standards as follows:
1) No greater than 60 dBA CNEL at the property lines of existing residential receptors adjoining the
Specific Plan area; and,
2) No greater than 70 dBA CNEL at the property lines of on-site residential receptors within the
Specific Plan area.
11872
41 February 2020
7 Summary of Findings
This noise report was conducted for the proposed project. The results indicate that potential impacts during
construction would be less than significant with mitigation. Noise impacts due to operation of the proposed project
(including traffic noise) would be less than significant. For some regular and special events hosted at the venue
associated with The Barn and The Social facilities, potential noise impacts could arise but would be mitigated to a
less than significant level. No further mitigation beyond what has been described herein is anticipated at this time.
NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE FARM IN POWAY PROJECT
11872
42 February 2020
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
11872
43 February 2020
8 References Cited
Bies, D., and Hansen, C. 1996. Engineering Noise Control. 2nd edition.
Berger, E., Neitzel, R., and Kladden, C. (Berger et al). 2015. Noise NavigatorTM Sound Level Database with Over
1700 Measurement Values. E-A-R 88-34/HP, version 1.8. June 26.
Caltrans (California Department of Transportation). 2013a. Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise
Analysis Protocol. September 2013.
Caltrans. 2013b. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual. Division of Environmental
Analysis, Environmental Engineering, Hazardous Waste, Air, Noise, Paleontology Office. Sacramento,
California. September 2013.
City of Poway. 2019. Poway Municipal Code
Darling, David. (unknown date) Decibel levels of musical instruments. Accessed April 28, 2019 at
http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia_of_music/D/decibel.html
DOT (U.S. Department of Transportation). 2006.
Dyno Nobel. 2010. Blasting and Explosives Quick Reference Guide.
https://www.leg.state.mn.us/docs/2015/other/150681/PFEISref_1/Dyno%20Nobel%202010.pdf
Farmtek. 2019. https://www.farmtek.com/farm/supplies/prod1;ft_ag_growing_supplies-
ft_greenhouse_equipment-ft_greenhouse_fans;pg105530_116193.html
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 2008. Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM), Software Version 1.1.
U.S. Department of Transportation, Research and Innovative Technology Administration, John A. Volpe
National Transportation Systems Center, Environmental Measurement and Modeling Division.
Washington, D.C. December 8
FHWA. 2006. Roadway Construction Noise Model: User’s Guide. Final Report. FHWA-HEP-06-015. DOT-VNTSC-
FHWA-06-02. Cambridge, Massachusetts: DOT, Research and Innovative Technology Administration. Final
Report. August.
FHWA. 2004. FHWA Traffic Noise Model Version 2.5.
FTA (Federal Transit Administration). 2006. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment. Final Report. FTA-VA-
90-1003-06. May.
Hayne, M.J., R.H. Rumble, and D.J. Mee. 2006. “Prediction of Crowd Noise.” Proceedings of ACOUSTICS 2006,
Christchurch, New Zealand, November 20–22, 2006. Accessed March 29, 2019.
https://www.acoustics.asn.au/conference_proceedings/AASNZ2006/papers/p46.pdf.
Helmut. 2019. How to Block Barking Dog Noise. https://noisyworld.org/how-to-block-barking-dog-noise/
Johnson Controls. 2010. 561927-YTG-A-0410. Technical Guide – Affinity Split-System Heat Pumps.
NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE FARM IN POWAY PROJECT
11872
44 February 2020
OPR (Governor’s Office of Planning and Research). 2017. State of California 2017 General Plan Guidelines.
Accessed May 10, 2019. http://www.opr.ca.gov/docs/OPR_COMPLETE_7.31.17.pdf.
OPR. 2003. State of California General Plan Guidelines. October 2003.
SMA Ventures LLC. 2019. The Farm in Poway Public Draft Specific Plan No. 1. January 2020.
Spendiarian and Willis (Spendiarian and Willis Acoustics and Noise Control LLC). 2012. Noise Survey: Proposed
Pickleball Courts Iron Oaks at Sun Lakes. Prepared for Sun Lakes HOA No. 3. September 7, 2012.
http://ironoakstennis.net/Documents/NoiseTesting.pdf.
Appendix A
Noise Measurement Field Data
Field Noise Measurement Data
Record: 1148
Project Name The Farms
Observer(s)Connor Burke
Date 2019-06-11
Meteorological Conditions
Temp (F)87
Humidity % (R.H.)43
Wind Light
Wind Speed (MPH)8
Wind Direction South West
Sky Sunny
Instrument and Calibrator Information
Instrument Name List (ENC) Rion NL-52
Instrument Name (ENC) Rion NL-52
Instrument Name Lookup Key (ENC) Rion NL-52
Manufacturer Rion
Model NL-52
Serial Number 553896
Calibrator Name (ENC) LD CAL150
Calibrator Name (ENC) LD CAL150
Calibrator Name Lookup Key (ENC) LD CAL150
Calibrator Manufacturer Larson Davis
Calibrator Model LD CAL150
Calibrator Serial #5152
Pre-Test (dBA SPL)94
Post-Test (dBA SPL)94
Windscreen Yes
Weighting?A-WTD
Slow/Fast?Slow
ANSI?Yes
Monitoring
Record #1
Site ID ST1
Site Location Lat/Long 33.018464, -117.039703
Begin (Time)10:20:00
End (Time)10:30:00
Leq 64.9
Lmax 75.1
Lmin 44.3
Other Lx?L90, L50, L10
L90 49.8
L50 60.3
L10 69.3
Other Lx (Specify Metric)L
Primary Noise Source Traffic
Other Noise Sources (Background)Birds, Distant Aircraft, Distant Traffic, Rustling Leaves
Other Noise Sources Additional Description Helicopter fly by
Is the same instrument and calibrator being used
as previously noted?
Yes
Are the meteorological conditions the same as
previously noted?
Yes
Page 1/5
Source Info and Traffic Counts
Number of Lanes 2
Lane Width (feet)10
Roadway Width (feet)20
Roadway Width (m)6.1
Distance to Roadway (feet)40
Distance to Roadway (m)12.2
Distance Measured to Centerline or Edge of
Pavement?
Edge of Pavement
Estimated Vehicle Speed (MPH)45
Traffic Counts
Vehicle Count Summary A 112, MT 4, HT 0, B 0, MC 0
Select Method for Recording Count Duration Enter Manually
Counting Both Directions?Yes
Count Duration (minutes)10
Vehicle Count Tally
Select Method for Vehicle Counts Enter Manually
Number of Vehicles - Autos 112
Number of Vehicles - Medium Trucks 4
Number of Vehicles - Heavy Trucks 0
Number of Vehicles - Buses 0
Number of Vehicles - Motorcyles 0
Description / Photos
Site Photos
Photo
Comments / Description Facing north.
Page 2/5
Monitoring
Record #2
Site ID ST4
Site Location Lat/Long 33.022707, -117.034781
Begin (Time)11:00:00
End (Time)11:10:00
Leq 52.5
Lmax 64.5
Lmin 36.3
Other Lx?L90, L50, L10
L90 38.8
L50 44.6
L10 56.2
Other Lx (Specify Metric)L
Primary Noise Source Birds/distant aircraft
Other Noise Sources (Background)Birds, Distant Aircraft, Distant Traffic, Rustling Leaves
Is the same instrument and calibrator being used
as previously noted?
Yes
Are the meteorological conditions the same as
previously noted?
Yes
Description / Photos
Site Photos
Photo
Comments / Description Facing east.
Page 3/5
Monitoring
Record #3
Site ID ST3
Site Location Lat/Long 33.032444, -117.030992
Begin (Time)11:15:00
End (Time)11:25:00
Leq 42.2
Lmax 67.5
Lmin 34.2
Other Lx?L90, L50, L10
L90 35.2
L50 37.3
L10 44.7
Other Lx (Specify Metric)L
Primary Noise Source Birds
Other Noise Sources (Background)Birds, Distant Aircraft, Distant Conversations / Yelling, Distant Traffic, Rustling Leaves
Other Noise Sources Additional Description Distant nail gun
Is the same instrument and calibrator being used
as previously noted?
Yes
Are the meteorological conditions the same as
previously noted?
Yes
Description / Photos
Site Photos
Photo
Comments / Description Facing south
Page 4/5
Monitoring
Record #4
Site ID ST2
Site Location Lat/Long 33.026245, -117.038944
Begin (Time)11:30:00
End (Time)11:40:00
Leq 43.1
Lmax 49.9
Lmin 36.3
Other Lx?L90, L50, L10
L90 37.8
L50 41.6
L10 46.3
Other Lx (Specify Metric)L
Primary Noise Source Birds
Other Noise Sources (Background)Birds, Distant Traffic, Rustling Leaves
Is the same instrument and calibrator being used
as previously noted?
Yes
Are the meteorological conditions the same as
previously noted?
Yes
Description / Photos
Site Photos
Photo
Comments / Description Facing south.
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
Page 5/5
Appendix B
Construction Noise Modeling Input and Output
The Farm in Poway - Technical Noise Report Appendix B - Construction Noise Modeling Worksheets
To User: bordered cells are inputs, unbordered cells have formulae noise level limit for construction phase, per City of Poway =75
allowable hours over which Leq is to be averaged (example: 8 for Poway, County of San Diego, or FTA guidance) = 8
Construction Phase Equipment Total
Equipment Qty
AUF % (from
FHWA RCNM)
Reference
Lmax @ 50 ft.
from FHWA
RCNM
Client Equipment Description, Data Source and/or
Notes
Source to NSR
Distance (ft.)
Distance-
Adjusted Lmax
Allowable
Operation Time
(hours)
Allowable
Operation Time
(minutes)
Predicted 8-
hour Leq
Demolition Dozer 0 40 82 0 0 0 0 0
Excavator 0 40 81 0 0 0 0 0
Concrete Saw 0 20 90 0 0 0 0 0
Total for Demolition Phase:4.8
Site Preparation Dozer 1 40 82 150 72 8 480 68
Backhoe 1 40 78 150 68 8 480 64
Front End Loader 1 40 79 150 69 8 480 65
Total for Site Preparation Phase:71.3
Grading Excavator 1 40 81 150 71 8 480 67
Grader 1 40 85 150 75 8 480 71
Dozer 0 40 82 150 0 8 480 0
Front End Loader 0 40 79 150 0 8 480 0
Backhoe 0 40 78 150 0 8 480 0
Scraper 1 40 84 150 74 8 480 70
Total for Grading Phase:74.92
Building Construction Crane 0 16 81 0 0 0 0 0
Man Lift 0 20 75 0 0 0 0 0
Generator 0 50 72 0 0 0 0 0
Backhoe 0 40 78 0 0 0 0 0
Front End Loader 0 40 79 0 0 0 0 0
Welder / Torch 0 40 73 0 0 0 0 0
Total for Building Construction Phase:7.8
Paving Paver 0 50 77 0 0 0 0 0
Roller 0 20 80 0 0 0 0 0
All Other Equipment > 5 HP 0 50 85 0 0 0 0 0
Total for Paving Phase:4.8
Architectural Coating Compressor (air) 0 40 78 0 0 0 0 0
Total for Architectural Coating Phase:0.0
TheFarms_cons-noise-est_mcs011120 prepared by Dudek Meadow
The Farm in Poway - Technical Noise Report Appendix B - Construction Noise Modeling Worksheets
To User: bordered cells are inputs, unbordered cells have formulae noise level limit for construction phase, per City of Poway =75
allowable hours over which Leq is to be averaged (example: 8 for Poway, County of San Diego, or FTA guidance) = 8
Construction Phase Equipment
Total
Equipment Qty
AUF % (from
FHWA RCNM)
Reference
Lmax @ 50 ft.
from FHWA
RCNM
Client Equipment Description, Data Source and/or
Notes
Source to NSR
Distance (ft.)
Distance-
Adjusted Lmax
Allowable
Operation Time
(hours)
Allowable
Operation Time
(minutes)
Predicted 8-
hour Leq
Demolition Dozer 0 40 82 0 0 0 0 0
Excavator 0 40 81 0 0 0 0 0
Concrete Saw 0 20 90 0 0 0 0 0
Total for Demolition Phase:4.8
Site Preparation Dozer 0 40 82 25 0 1 60 0
Backhoe 1 40 78 25 84 1 60 71
Front End Loader 1 40 79 25 85 1 60 72
Total for Site Preparation Phase:74.5
Grading Excavator 0 40 81 25 0 1 60 0
Grader 1 40 85 25 91 1 60 78
Dozer 0 40 82 25 0 1 60 0
Front End Loader 0 40 79 25 0 1 60 0
Backhoe 0 40 78 25 0 1 60 0
Scraper 0 40 84 25 0 1 60 0
Total for Grading Phase:78.02
Building Construction Crane 0 16 81 0 0 0 0 0
Man Lift 0 20 75 0 0 0 0 0
Generator 1 50 72 25 78 1 60 66
Backhoe 0 40 78 0 0 0 0 0
Front End Loader 0 40 79 0 0 0 0 0
Welder / Torch 1 40 73 25 79 1 60 66
Total for Building Construction Phase:69.0
Paving Paver 1 50 77 25 83 1 60 71
Concrete mixer truck 1 40 79 25 85 1 60 72
Total for Paving Phase:74.5
Architectural Coating Compressor (air) 0 40 78 0 0 0 0 0
Total for Architectural Coating Phase:0.0
TheFarms_cons-noise-est_mcs011120 prepared by Dudek Trail_System
The Farm in Poway - Technical Noise Report Appendix B - Construction Noise Modeling Worksheets
To User: bordered cells are inputs, unbordered cells have formulae noise level limit for construction phase, per City of Poway =75
allowable hours over which Leq is to be averaged (example: 8 for Poway, County of San Diego, or FTA guidance) = 8
Construction Phase Equipment Total
Equipment Qty
AUF % (from
FHWA RCNM)
Reference
Lmax @ 50 ft.
from FHWA
RCNM
Client Equipment Description, Data Source and/or
Notes
Source to NSR
Distance (ft.)
Distance-
Adjusted Lmax
Allowable
Operation Time
(hours)
Allowable
Operation Time
(minutes)
Predicted 8-
hour Leq
Demolition Dozer 1 40 82 120 74 4 240 67
Excavator 1 40 81 120 73 4 240 66
Concrete Saw 1 20 90 120 82 4 240 72
Total for Demolition Phase:74.4
Site Preparation Dozer 1 40 82 50 82 2 120 72
Backhoe 1 40 78 50 78 2 120 68
Front End Loader 1 40 79 50 79 2 120 69
Total for Site Preparation Phase:74.8
Grading Excavator 1 40 81 50 81 1 60 68
Grader 1 40 85 50 85 0.75 45 71
Dozer 0 40 82 50 0 1 60 0
Front End Loader 0 40 79 50 0 1 60 0
Backhoe 0 40 78 50 0 1 60 0
Scraper 1 40 84 50 84 1 60 71
Total for Grading Phase:74.92
Building Construction Crane 1 16 81 100 75 8 480 67
Man Lift 1 20 75 100 69 8 480 62
Generator 1 50 72 100 66 8 480 63
Backhoe 1 40 78 100 72 8 480 68
Front End Loader 1 40 79 100 73 8 480 69
Welder / Torch 1 40 73 100 67 8 480 63
Total for Building Construction Phase:74.0
Paving Paver 0 50 77 0 0 0 0 0
Roller 0 20 80 0 0 0 0 0
All Other Equipment > 5 HP 0 50 85 0 0 0 0 0
Total for Paving Phase:4.8
Architectural Coating Compressor (air) 1 40 78 100 72 8 480 68
Total for Architectural Coating Phase:68.0
TheFarms_cons-noise-est_mcs011120 prepared by Dudek Newhomes
The Farm in Poway - Technical Noise Report Appendix B - Construction Noise Modeling Worksheets
To User: bordered cells are inputs, unbordered cells have formulae noise level limit for construction phase, per City of Poway =75
allowable hours over which Leq is to be averaged (example: 8 for Poway, County of San Diego, or FTA guidance) = 8
Construction Phase Equipment Total
Equipment Qty
AUF % (from
FHWA RCNM)
Reference
Lmax @ 50 ft.
from FHWA
RCNM
Client Equipment Description, Data Source and/or
Notes
Source to NSR
Distance (ft.)
Distance-
Adjusted Lmax
Allowable
Operation Time
(hours)
Allowable
Operation Time
(minutes)
Predicted 8-
hour Leq
Demolition Dozer 1 40 82 120 74 4 240 67
Excavator 1 40 81 120 73 4 240 66
Concrete Saw 1 20 90 120 82 4 240 72
Total for Demolition Phase:74.4
Site Preparation Dozer 1 40 82 50 82 2 120 72
Backhoe 1 40 78 50 78 2 120 68
Front End Loader 1 40 79 50 79 2 120 69
Total for Site Preparation Phase:74.8
Grading Excavator 1 40 81 50 81 1 60 68
Grader 1 40 85 50 85 0.75 45 71
Dozer 0 40 82 50 0 1 60 0
Front End Loader 0 40 79 50 0 1 60 0
Backhoe 0 40 78 50 0 1 60 0
Scraper 1 40 84 50 84 1 60 71
Total for Grading Phase:74.92
Building Construction Crane 1 16 81 360 64 8 480 56
Man Lift 1 20 75 360 58 8 480 51
Generator 1 50 72 360 55 8 480 52
Backhoe 1 40 78 360 61 8 480 57
Front End Loader 1 40 79 360 62 8 480 58
Welder / Torch 1 40 73 360 56 8 480 52
Total for Building Construction Phase:62.8
Paving Paver 1 50 77 120 69 4 240 63
Roller 1 20 80 120 72 4 240 62
All Other Equipment > 5 HP 1 50 85 120 77 4 240 71
Total for Paving Phase:72.5
Architectural Coating Compressor (air) 1 40 78 360 61 8 480 57
Total for Architectural Coating Phase:56.9
TheFarms_cons-noise-est_mcs011120 prepared by Dudek Barn
The Farm in Poway - Technical Noise Report Appendix B - Construction Noise Modeling Worksheets
To User: bordered cells are inputs, unbordered cells have formulae noise level limit for construction phase, per City of Poway =75
allowable hours over which Leq is to be averaged (example: 8 for Poway, County of San Diego, or FTA guidance) = 8
Construction Phase Equipment Total
Equipment Qty
AUF % (from
FHWA RCNM)
Reference
Lmax @ 50 ft.
from FHWA
RCNM
Client Equipment Description, Data Source and/or
Notes
Source to NSR
Distance (ft.)
Distance-
Adjusted Lmax
Allowable
Operation Time
(hours)
Allowable
Operation Time
(minutes)
Predicted 8-
hour Leq
Demolition Dozer 1 40 82 120 74 4 240 67
Excavator 1 40 81 120 73 4 240 66
Concrete Saw 1 20 90 120 82 4 240 72
Total for Demolition Phase:74.4
Site Preparation Dozer 1 40 82 50 82 2 120 72
Backhoe 1 40 78 50 78 2 120 68
Front End Loader 1 40 79 50 79 2 120 69
Total for Site Preparation Phase:74.8
Grading Excavator 1 40 81 50 81 1 60 68
Grader 1 40 85 50 85 0.75 45 71
Dozer 0 40 82 50 0 1 60 0
Front End Loader 0 40 79 50 0 1 60 0
Backhoe 0 40 78 50 0 1 60 0
Scraper 1 40 84 50 84 1 60 71
Total for Grading Phase:74.92
Building Construction Crane 1 16 81 300 65 8 480 57
Man Lift 1 20 75 300 59 8 480 52
Generator 1 50 72 300 56 8 480 53
Backhoe 1 40 78 300 62 8 480 58
Front End Loader 1 40 79 300 63 8 480 59
Welder / Torch 1 40 73 300 57 8 480 53
Total for Building Construction Phase:64.4
Paving Paver 1 50 77 50 77 1 60 65
Roller 1 20 80 50 80 1 60 64
All Other Equipment > 5 HP 1 50 85 50 85 1 60 73
Total for Paving Phase:74.0
Architectural Coating Compressor (air) 1 40 78 300 62 8 480 58
Total for Architectural Coating Phase:58.5
TheFarms_cons-noise-est_mcs011120 prepared by Dudek Club
The Farm in Poway - Technical Noise Report Appendix B - Construction Noise Modeling Worksheets
To User: bordered cells are inputs, unbordered cells have formulae noise level limit for construction phase, per City of Poway =75
allowable hours over which Leq is to be averaged (example: 8 for Poway, County of San Diego, or FTA guidance) = 8
Construction Phase Equipment Total
Equipment Qty
AUF % (from
FHWA RCNM)
Reference
Lmax @ 50 ft.
from FHWA
RCNM
Client Equipment Description, Data Source and/or
Notes
Source to NSR
Distance (ft.)
Distance-
Adjusted Lmax
Allowable
Operation Time
(hours)
Allowable
Operation Time
(minutes)
Predicted 8-
hour Leq
Demolition Dozer 0 40 82 0 0 0 0 0
Excavator 0 40 81 0 0 0 0 0
Concrete Saw 0 20 90 0 0 0 0 0
Total for Demolition Phase:4.8
Site Preparation Dozer 1 40 82 36 85 2 120 75
Backhoe 1 40 78 36 81 2 120 71
Front End Loader 1 40 79 36 82 2 120 72
Total for Site Preparation Phase:77.6
Grading Excavator 1 40 81 36 84 1 60 71
Grader 1 40 85 36 88 0.75 45 74
Dozer 0 40 82 36 0 1 60 0
Front End Loader 0 40 79 36 0 1 60 0
Backhoe 0 40 78 36 0 1 60 0
Scraper 1 40 84 36 87 1 60 74
Total for Grading Phase:77.72
Building Construction Crane 0 16 81 0 0 0 0 0
Man Lift 0 20 75 0 0 0 0 0
Generator 0 50 72 0 0 0 0 0
Backhoe 0 40 78 0 0 0 0 0
Front End Loader 0 40 79 0 0 0 0 0
Welder / Torch 0 40 73 0 0 0 0 0
Total for Building Construction Phase:7.8
Paving Paver 1 50 77 36 80 1 60 68
Roller 1 20 80 36 83 1 60 67
All Other Equipment > 5 HP 1 50 85 36 88 1 60 76
Total for Paving Phase:76.9
Architectural Coating Compressor (air) 0 40 78 0 0 0 0 0
Total for Architectural Coating Phase:0.0
TheFarms_cons-noise-est_mcs011120 prepared by Dudek PvtRdB
The Farm in Poway - Technical Noise Report Appendix B - Construction Noise Modeling Worksheets
To User: bordered cells are inputs, unbordered cells have formulae noise level limit for construction phase, per City of Poway =75
allowable hours over which Leq is to be averaged (example: 8 for Poway, County of San Diego, or FTA guidance) = 8
Construction Phase Equipment Total
Equipment Qty
AUF % (from
FHWA RCNM)
Reference
Lmax @ 50 ft.
from FHWA
RCNM
Client Equipment Description, Data Source and/or
Notes
Source to NSR
Distance (ft.)
Distance-
Adjusted Lmax
Allowable
Operation Time
(hours)
Allowable
Operation Time
(minutes)
Predicted 8-
hour Leq
Demolition Dozer 1 40 82 120 74 4 240 67
Excavator 1 40 81 120 73 4 240 66
Concrete Saw 1 20 90 120 82 4 240 72
Total for Demolition Phase:74.4
Site Preparation Dozer 1 40 82 15 92 2 120 82
Backhoe 1 40 78 15 88 2 120 78
Front End Loader 1 40 79 15 89 2 120 79
Total for Site Preparation Phase:85.2
Grading Excavator 1 40 81 15 91 1 60 78
Grader 1 40 85 15 95 0.75 45 81
Dozer 0 40 82 15 0 1 60 0
Front End Loader 0 40 79 15 0 1 60 0
Backhoe 0 40 78 15 0 1 60 0
Scraper 1 40 84 15 94 1 60 81
Total for Grading Phase:85.32
Building Construction Crane 0 16 81 0 0 0 0 0
Man Lift 0 20 75 0 0 0 0 0
Generator 0 50 72 0 0 0 0 0
Backhoe 0 40 78 0 0 0 0 0
Front End Loader 0 40 79 0 0 0 0 0
Welder / Torch 0 40 73 0 0 0 0 0
Total for Building Construction Phase:7.8
Paving Paver 0 50 77 0 0 0 0 0
Roller 0 20 80 0 0 0 0 0
All Other Equipment > 5 HP 0 50 85 0 0 0 0 0
Total for Paving Phase:4.8
Architectural Coating Compressor (air) 0 40 78 0 0 0 0 0
Total for Architectural Coating Phase:0.0
TheFarms_cons-noise-est_mcs011120 prepared by Dudek Basin
The Farm in Poway - Technical Noise Report Appendix B - Construction Noise Modeling Worksheets
To User: bordered cells are inputs, unbordered cells have formulae noise level limit for construction phase, per City of Poway =75
allowable hours over which Leq is to be averaged (example: 8 for Poway, County of San Diego, or FTA guidance) = 8
Construction Phase Equipment Total
Equipment Qty
AUF % (from
FHWA RCNM)
Reference
Lmax @ 50 ft.
from FHWA
RCNM
Client Equipment Description, Data Source and/or
Notes
Source to NSR
Distance (ft.)
Distance-
Adjusted Lmax
Allowable
Operation Time
(hours)
Allowable
Operation Time
(minutes)
Predicted 8-
hour Leq
Demolition Dozer 0 40 82 0 0 0 0 0
Excavator 0 40 81 0 0 0 0 0
Concrete Saw 0 20 90 0 0 0 0 0
Total for Demolition Phase:4.8
Site Preparation Dozer 1 40 82 50 82 2 120 72
Backhoe 1 40 78 50 78 2 120 68
Front End Loader 1 40 79 50 79 2 120 69
Total for Site Preparation Phase:74.8
Grading Excavator 1 40 81 50 81 1 60 68
Grader 1 40 85 50 85 0.75 45 71
Dozer 0 40 82 50 0 1 60 0
Front End Loader 0 40 79 50 0 1 60 0
Backhoe 0 40 78 50 0 1 60 0
Scraper 1 40 84 50 84 1 60 71
Total for Grading Phase:74.92
Building Construction Crane 0 16 81 0 0 0 0 0
Man Lift 0 20 75 0 0 0 0 0
Generator 0 50 72 0 0 0 0 0
Backhoe 0 40 78 0 0 0 0 0
Front End Loader 0 40 79 0 0 0 0 0
Welder / Torch 0 40 73 0 0 0 0 0
Total for Building Construction Phase:7.8
Paving Paver 0 50 77 0 0 0 0 0
Roller 0 20 80 0 0 0 0 0
All Other Equipment > 5 HP 0 50 85 0 0 0 0 0
Total for Paving Phase:4.8
Architectural Coating Compressor (air) 0 40 78 0 0 0 0 0
Total for Architectural Coating Phase:0.0
TheFarms_cons-noise-est_mcs011120 prepared by Dudek Agri
Appendix C
Traffic Noise Modeling Input and Output
RESULTS: SOUND LEVELSThe FarmDudek 18 June 2019 CB TNM 2.5 Calculated with TNM 2.5 RESULTS: SOUND LEVELS PROJECT/CONTRACT: The Farm RUN: Existing BARRIER DESIGN: INPUT HEIGHTS Average pavement type shall be used unless a State highway agency substantiates the use ATMOSPHERICS: 68 deg F, 50% RH of a different type with approval of FHWA.ReceiverNameNo.#DUsExistingNo BarrierWith BarrierLAeq1hLAeq1h Increase over existing TypeCalculatedNoise ReductionCalculatedCrit'nCalculatedCrit'nImpactLAeq1hCalculatedGoalCalculatedSub'l IncminusGoaldBA dBA dBA dB dB dBA dB dB dB ST1 1 1 64.0 65.7 66 1.7 10 ----65.7 0.0 8 -8.0 ST4 2 1 52.5 47.8 66 -4.7 10 ----47.8 0.0 8 -8.0 ST2 3 1 43.1 41.0 66 -2.1 10 ----41.0 0.0 8 -8.0 ST3 4 1 42.2 52.5 66 10.3 10 Sub'l Inc52.5 0.0 8 -8.0 Dwelling Units # DUs Noise Reduction Min Avg Max dB dB dB All Selected40.0 0.00.0 All Impacted10.0 0.00.0 All that meet NR Goal00.0 0.00.0C:\TNM25\PROJECTS\THE FARM\Existing 118 June 2019
INPUT: ROADWAYSThe FarmDudek 18 June 2019 CB TNM 2.5 INPUT: ROADWAYS Average pavement type shall be used unlessPROJECT/CONTRACT:The Farm a State highway agency substantiates the useRUN:Existing of a different type with the approval of FHWARoadwayPointsNameWidthNameNo.Coordinates (pavement)Flow ControlSegmentXYZControlSpeedPercentPvmtOnDeviceConstraintVehiclesTypeStruct?Affectedft ft ft ft mph % West Espola W7 25.0 point1 1 1,271.9 885.2 0.00 Average point2 2 2,478.0 878.0 0.00 East Espola W7 25.0 point3 3 1,280.9 858.1 0.00 Average point4 4 2,474.4 858.1 0.00 West Espola E7 25.0 point5 5 2,528.5 878.0 0.00 Average point6 6 3,716.5 870.8 0.00 Average point7 7 4,221.3 865.1 0.00 East Espola E10 25.0 point16 16 7,502.8 683.3 0.00 Average point17 17 7,008.8 744.6 0.00 Average point18 18 6,756.4 773.4 0.00 Average point19 19 6,487.8 807.6 0.00 Average point20 20 5,563.4 826.3 0.00 Average point21 21 4,939.7 842.5 0.00 West Espola Rd E11 30.0 point23 23 7,568.0 693.5 0.00 Average point24 24 8,069.2 634.1 0.00 Average point25 25 8,274.7 605.2 0.00 Average point26 26 8,545.2 484.4 0.00 Average point27 27 8,748.9 322.1 0.00 Average point28 28 8,947.2 46.3 0.00 East Espola Rd E11 30.0 point29 29 8,897.8 43.3 0.00 Average point30 30 8,739.1 286.6 0.00 Average point31 31 8,627.4 391.2 0.00 Average point32 32 8,338.9 549.9 0.00 Average point33 33 8,077.5 607.5 0.00 Average point34 34 7,576.3 658.0 0.00C:\TNM25\PROJECTS\THE FARM\Existing 118 June 2019
INPUT: ROADWAYSThe Farm Cloudcroft Dr N10 40.0 point35 35 4,949.1 887.8 0.00 Average point36 36 4,949.1 1,875.6 0.00 Average point37 37 4,944.7 2,055.4 0.00 Average point38 38 4,958.0 2,146.5 0.00 Average point39 39 5,022.4 2,233.0 0.00 CloudCroft Dr N25 40.0 point40 40 5,051.2 2,253.0 0.00 Average point41 41 5,137.8 2,295.2 0.00 Average point42 42 5,197.7 2,312.9 0.00 Average point43 43 6,201.1 2,293.0 0.00 Average point44 44 6,250.0 2,295.2 0.00 Average point45 45 6,245.5 2,506.1 0.00 Average point46 46 6,238.9 2,721.4 0.00 Average point47 47 6,181.2 2,938.9 0.00 Average point48 48 6,056.8 3,087.7 0.00 Average point49 49 5,894.8 3,196.5 0.00 Average point50 50 5,726.1 3,271.9 0.00 Average point51 51 5,424.2 3,287.5 0.00 Average point52 52 5,180.0 3,316.3 0.00 Average point53 53 5,111.2 3,371.8 0.00 Tam O Shanter N24 40.0 point54 54 5,093.4 3,380.7 0.00 Average point55 55 5,013.5 3,525.0 0.00 Average point56 56 4,995.7 3,558.3 0.00 Average point57 57 4,953.6 3,818.0 0.00 Average point58 58 4,933.6 4,008.9 0.00 Average point59 59 4,935.8 4,142.1 0.00 Average point60 60 4,962.4 4,337.5 0.00 Average point61 61 4,995.7 4,523.9 0.00 Average point62 62 5,042.4 4,617.2 0.00 Average point63 63 5,075.7 4,674.9 0.00 Average point64 64 5,162.2 4,732.6 0.00 Average point65 65 5,262.1 4,748.1 0.00 Average point66 66 6,012.4 4,743.7 0.00 Average point67 67 6,687.3 4,748.1 0.00 Average point68 68 6,760.5 4,757.0 0.00 Average point69 69 6,913.7 5,098.9 0.00 St Andrews Dr 40.0 point70 70 6,922.6 5,132.2 0.00 Average point72 72 7,026.9 5,416.3 0.00 Average point73 73 7,035.8 5,496.2 0.00 Average point74 74 6,971.4 5,689.4 0.00 Average C:\TNM25\PROJECTS\THE FARM\Existing 218 June 2019
INPUT: ROADWAYSThe Farm point75 75 6,878.2 5,778.1 0.00 Average point76 76 6,753.9 5,842.5 0.00 Average point77 77 6,536.3 5,849.2 0.00 Average point78 78 4,891.4 5,824.8 0.00 Average point79 79 4,682.7 5,793.7 0.00 Average point80 80 4,471.9 5,691.6 0.00 Average point81 81 4,318.7 5,556.2 0.00 Average point82 82 4,178.8 5,387.5 0.00 Average point83 83 4,138.9 5,325.3 0.00 Average point84 84 4,078.9 5,163.3 0.00 Average point85 85 4,050.1 5,036.7 0.00 Average point86 86 4,041.2 4,273.1 0.00 Average point87 87 4,014.6 3,542.7 0.00 Average point88 88 4,012.3 2,583.8 0.00 Average point89 89 4,007.9 2,328.5 0.00 Average point90 90 4,005.7 2,146.5 0.00 Average point91 91 3,992.4 2,051.0 0.00 Average point92 92 3,916.9 1,911.2 0.00 Average point93 93 3,834.7 1,824.6 0.00 Average point94 94 3,739.3 1,766.9 0.00 Average point95 95 3,248.7 1,524.9 0.00 Average point96 96 3,084.4 1,462.7 0.00 Average point97 97 3,033.4 1,458.3 0.00 Average point71 71 2,551.7 1,449.4 0.00 Valley Verde Rd S8 50.0 point98 98 2,503.3 907.8 0.00 Average point99 99 2,505.5 1,009.9 0.00 Average point100 100 2,518.8 1,125.3 0.00 Average point101 101 2,518.8 1,229.7 0.00 Average point102 102 2,521.0 1,447.2 0.00 West Espola E10-2 25.0 point103 103 4,949.3 861.1 0.00 Average point9 9 5,541.0 850.9 0.00 Average point10 10 5,957.4 841.9 0.00 Average point11 11 6,489.2 825.7 0.00 Average point12 12 6,871.5 780.6 0.00 Average point13 13 7,105.8 748.2 0.00 Average point14 14 7,484.4 704.9 0.00 Average point15 15 7,515.1 701.3 0.00 East Espola E9 25.0 point104 104 4,939.7 842.5 0.00 Average point105 105 4,217.4 848.5 0.00C:\TNM25\PROJECTS\THE FARM\Existing 318 June 2019
INPUT: ROADWAYSThe Farm West Espola E9 25.0 point106 106 4,221.3 865.1 0.00 Average point8 8 4,949.3 861.1 0.00 East Espola E7 25.0 point107 107 4,217.4 848.5 0.00 Average point22 22 2,534.3 854.5 0.00C:\TNM25\PROJECTS\THE FARM\Existing 418 June 2019
INPUT: TRAFFIC FOR LAeq1h VolumesThe FarmDudek 18 June 2019 CB TNM 2.5 INPUT: TRAFFIC FOR LAeq1h Volumes PROJECT/CONTRACT:The Farm RUN:Existing Roadway PointsNameNameNo.SegmentAutos MTrucks HTrucks Buses Motorcycles VSVSVSVSVSveh/hr mph veh/hr mph veh/hr mph veh/hr mph veh/hr mph West Espola W7 point1 1101935 2135 1135 0 0 0 0 point2 2 East Espola W7 point3 3101935 2135 1135 0 0 0 0 point4 4 West Espola E7 point5 5 773 35 16 35 8 35 0 0 0 0 point6 6 773 35 16 35 8 35 0 0 0 0 point7 7 East Espola E10 point16 16 702 35 14 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point17 17 702 35 14 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point18 18 702 35 14 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point19 19 702 35 14 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point20 20 702 35 14 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point21 21 West Espola Rd E11 point23 23 594 35 12 35 6 35 0 0 0 0 point24 24 594 35 12 35 6 35 0 0 0 0 point25 25 594 35 12 35 6 35 0 0 0 0 point26 26 594 35 12 35 6 35 0 0 0 0 point27 27 594 35 12 35 6 35 0 0 0 0 point28 28 East Espola Rd E11 point29 29 594 35 12 35 6 35 0 0 0 0 point30 30 594 35 12 35 6 35 0 0 0 0 point31 31 594 35 12 35 6 35 0 0 0 0 point32 32 594 35 12 35 6 35 0 0 0 0C:\TNM25\PROJECTS\THE FARM\Existing 118 J
INPUT: TRAFFIC FOR LAeq1h VolumesThe Farm point33 33 594 35 12 35 6 35 0 0 0 0 point34 34 Cloudcroft Dr N10 point35 35 132 25 3 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point36 36 132 25 3 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point37 37 132 25 3 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point38 38 132 25 3 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point39 39 CloudCroft Dr N25 point40 40 43 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 point41 41 43 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 point42 42 43 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 point43 43 43 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 point44 44 43 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 point45 45 43 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 point46 46 43 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 point47 47 43 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 point48 48 43 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 point49 49 43 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 point50 50 43 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 point51 51 43 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 point52 52 43 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 point53 53 Tam O Shanter N24 point54 54 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point55 55 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point56 56 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point57 57 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point58 58 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point59 59 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point60 60 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point61 61 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point62 62 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point63 63 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point64 64 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point65 65 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point66 66 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point67 67 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point68 68 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0C:\TNM25\PROJECTS\THE FARM\Existing 218 J
INPUT: TRAFFIC FOR LAeq1h VolumesThe Farm point69 69 St Andrews Dr point70 70 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point72 72 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point73 73 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point74 74 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point75 75 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point76 76 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point77 77 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point78 78 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point79 79 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point80 80 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point81 81 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point82 82 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point83 83 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point84 84 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point85 85 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point86 86 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point87 87 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point88 88 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point89 89 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point90 90 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point91 91 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point92 92 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point93 93 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point94 94 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point95 95 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point96 96 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point97 97 149 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point71 71 Valley Verde Rd S8 point98 98 611 35 13 35 6 35 0 0 0 0 point99 99 611 35 13 35 6 35 0 0 0 0 point100 100 611 35 13 35 6 35 0 0 0 0 point101 101 611 35 13 35 6 35 0 0 0 0 point102 102 West Espola E10-2 point103 103 702 35 14 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point9 9 702 35 14 35 7 35 0 0 0 0C:\TNM25\PROJECTS\THE FARM\Existing 318 J
INPUT: TRAFFIC FOR LAeq1h VolumesThe Farm point10 10 702 35 14 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point11 11 702 35 14 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point12 12 702 35 14 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point13 13 702 35 14 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point14 14 702 35 14 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point15 15 East Espola E9 point104 104 704 35 15 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point105 105 West Espola E9 point106 106 704 35 15 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point8 8 East Espola E7 point107 107 773 35 16 35 8 35 0 0 0 0 point22 22C:\TNM25\PROJECTS\THE FARM\Existing 418 J
INPUT: RECEIVERSThe FarmDudek 18 June 2019 CB TNM 2.5 INPUT: RECEIVERS PROJECT/CONTRACT:The Farm RUN:Existing ReceiverNameNo.#DUsCoordinates (ground)HeightInput Sound Levels and Criteria ActiveXYZaboveExistingImpact Criteria NRinGroundLAeq1hLAeq1hSub'lGoalCalc.ft ft ft ft dBA dBA dB dB ST1 1 1 4,228.2 801.6 0.00 4.92 64.00 66 10.0 8.0Y ST4 2 1 5,679.8 2,346.1 0.00 4.92 52.50 66 10.0 8.0Y ST2 3 1 4,384.1 3,690.0 0.00 4.92 43.10 66 10.0 8.0Y ST3 4 1 6,696.9 5,901.7 0.00 4.92 42.20 66 10.0 8.0Y C:\TNM25\PROJECTS\THE FARM\Existing 118 J
RESULTS: SOUND LEVELSThe FarmDudek 18 June 2019 CB TNM 2.5 Calculated with TNM 2.5 RESULTS: SOUND LEVELS PROJECT/CONTRACT: The Farm RUN: Near Opening Day BARRIER DESIGN: INPUT HEIGHTS Average pavement type shall be used unless a State highway agency substantiates the use ATMOSPHERICS: 68 deg F, 50% RH of a different type with approval of FHWA.ReceiverNameNo.#DUsExistingNo BarrierWith BarrierLAeq1hLAeq1h Increase over existing TypeCalculatedNoise ReductionCalculatedCrit'nCalculatedCrit'nImpactLAeq1hCalculatedGoalCalculatedSub'l IncminusGoaldBA dBA dBA dB dB dBA dB dB dB ST1 1 1 64.0 65.9 66 1.9 10 ----65.9 0.0 8 -8.0 ST4 2 1 52.5 48.0 66 -4.5 10 ----48.0 0.0 8 -8.0 ST2 3 1 43.1 41.1 66 -2.0 10 ----41.1 0.0 8 -8.0 ST3 4 1 42.2 52.6 66 10.4 10 Sub'l Inc52.6 0.0 8 -8.0 Dwelling Units # DUs Noise Reduction Min Avg Max dB dB dB All Selected40.0 0.00.0 All Impacted10.0 0.00.0 All that meet NR Goal00.0 0.00.0C:\TNM25\PROJECTS\THE FARM\Near Opening Day 118 June 2019
INPUT: ROADWAYSThe FarmDudek 18 June 2019 CB TNM 2.5 INPUT: ROADWAYS Average pavement type shall be used unlessPROJECT/CONTRACT:The Farm a State highway agency substantiates the useRUN:Near Opening Day of a different type with the approval of FHWARoadwayPointsNameWidthNameNo.Coordinates (pavement)Flow ControlSegmentXYZControlSpeedPercentPvmtOnDeviceConstraintVehiclesTypeStruct?Affectedft ft ft ft mph % West Espola W7 25.0 point1 1 1,271.9 885.2 0.00 Average point2 2 2,478.0 878.0 0.00 East Espola W7 25.0 point3 3 1,280.9 858.1 0.00 Average point4 4 2,474.4 858.1 0.00 West Espola E7 25.0 point5 5 2,528.5 878.0 0.00 Average point6 6 3,716.5 870.8 0.00 Average point7 7 4,221.3 865.1 0.00 East Espola E10 25.0 point16 16 7,502.8 683.3 0.00 Average point17 17 7,008.8 744.6 0.00 Average point18 18 6,756.4 773.4 0.00 Average point19 19 6,487.8 807.6 0.00 Average point20 20 5,563.4 826.3 0.00 Average point21 21 4,939.7 842.5 0.00 West Espola Rd E11 30.0 point23 23 7,568.0 693.5 0.00 Average point24 24 8,069.2 634.1 0.00 Average point25 25 8,274.7 605.2 0.00 Average point26 26 8,545.2 484.4 0.00 Average point27 27 8,748.9 322.1 0.00 Average point28 28 8,947.2 46.3 0.00 East Espola Rd E11 30.0 point29 29 8,897.8 43.3 0.00 Average point30 30 8,739.1 286.6 0.00 Average point31 31 8,627.4 391.2 0.00 Average point32 32 8,338.9 549.9 0.00 Average point33 33 8,077.5 607.5 0.00 Average point34 34 7,576.3 658.0 0.00C:\TNM25\PROJECTS\THE FARM\Near Opening Day 118 J
INPUT: ROADWAYSThe Farm Cloudcroft Dr N10 40.0 point35 35 4,949.1 887.8 0.00 Average point36 36 4,949.1 1,875.6 0.00 Average point37 37 4,944.7 2,055.4 0.00 Average point38 38 4,958.0 2,146.5 0.00 Average point39 39 5,022.4 2,233.0 0.00 CloudCroft Dr N25 40.0 point40 40 5,051.2 2,253.0 0.00 Average point41 41 5,137.8 2,295.2 0.00 Average point42 42 5,197.7 2,312.9 0.00 Average point43 43 6,201.1 2,293.0 0.00 Average point44 44 6,250.0 2,295.2 0.00 Average point45 45 6,245.5 2,506.1 0.00 Average point46 46 6,238.9 2,721.4 0.00 Average point47 47 6,181.2 2,938.9 0.00 Average point48 48 6,056.8 3,087.7 0.00 Average point49 49 5,894.8 3,196.5 0.00 Average point50 50 5,726.1 3,271.9 0.00 Average point51 51 5,424.2 3,287.5 0.00 Average point52 52 5,180.0 3,316.3 0.00 Average point53 53 5,111.2 3,371.8 0.00 Tam O Shanter N24 40.0 point54 54 5,093.4 3,380.7 0.00 Average point55 55 5,013.5 3,525.0 0.00 Average point56 56 4,995.7 3,558.3 0.00 Average point57 57 4,953.6 3,818.0 0.00 Average point58 58 4,933.6 4,008.9 0.00 Average point59 59 4,935.8 4,142.1 0.00 Average point60 60 4,962.4 4,337.5 0.00 Average point61 61 4,995.7 4,523.9 0.00 Average point62 62 5,042.4 4,617.2 0.00 Average point63 63 5,075.7 4,674.9 0.00 Average point64 64 5,162.2 4,732.6 0.00 Average point65 65 5,262.1 4,748.1 0.00 Average point66 66 6,012.4 4,743.7 0.00 Average point67 67 6,687.3 4,748.1 0.00 Average point68 68 6,760.5 4,757.0 0.00 Average point69 69 6,913.7 5,098.9 0.00 St Andrews Dr 40.0 point70 70 6,922.6 5,132.2 0.00 Average point72 72 7,026.9 5,416.3 0.00 Average point73 73 7,035.8 5,496.2 0.00 Average point74 74 6,971.4 5,689.4 0.00 Average C:\TNM25\PROJECTS\THE FARM\Near Opening Day 218 J
INPUT: ROADWAYSThe Farm point75 75 6,878.2 5,778.1 0.00 Average point76 76 6,753.9 5,842.5 0.00 Average point77 77 6,536.3 5,849.2 0.00 Average point78 78 4,891.4 5,824.8 0.00 Average point79 79 4,682.7 5,793.7 0.00 Average point80 80 4,471.9 5,691.6 0.00 Average point81 81 4,318.7 5,556.2 0.00 Average point82 82 4,178.8 5,387.5 0.00 Average point83 83 4,138.9 5,325.3 0.00 Average point84 84 4,078.9 5,163.3 0.00 Average point85 85 4,050.1 5,036.7 0.00 Average point86 86 4,041.2 4,273.1 0.00 Average point87 87 4,014.6 3,542.7 0.00 Average point88 88 4,012.3 2,583.8 0.00 Average point89 89 4,007.9 2,328.5 0.00 Average point90 90 4,005.7 2,146.5 0.00 Average point91 91 3,992.4 2,051.0 0.00 Average point92 92 3,916.9 1,911.2 0.00 Average point93 93 3,834.7 1,824.6 0.00 Average point94 94 3,739.3 1,766.9 0.00 Average point95 95 3,248.7 1,524.9 0.00 Average point96 96 3,084.4 1,462.7 0.00 Average point97 97 3,033.4 1,458.3 0.00 Average point71 71 2,551.7 1,449.4 0.00 Valley Verde Rd S8 50.0 point98 98 2,503.3 907.8 0.00 Average point99 99 2,505.5 1,009.9 0.00 Average point100 100 2,518.8 1,125.3 0.00 Average point101 101 2,518.8 1,229.7 0.00 Average point102 102 2,521.0 1,447.2 0.00 West Espola E10-2 25.0 point103 103 4,949.3 861.1 0.00 Average point9 9 5,541.0 850.9 0.00 Average point10 10 5,957.4 841.9 0.00 Average point11 11 6,489.2 825.7 0.00 Average point12 12 6,871.5 780.6 0.00 Average point13 13 7,105.8 748.2 0.00 Average point14 14 7,484.4 704.9 0.00 Average point15 15 7,515.1 701.3 0.00 East Espola E9 25.0 point104 104 4,939.7 842.5 0.00 Average point105 105 4,217.4 848.5 0.00C:\TNM25\PROJECTS\THE FARM\Near Opening Day 318 J
INPUT: ROADWAYSThe Farm West Espola E9 25.0 point106 106 4,221.3 865.1 0.00 Average point8 8 4,949.3 861.1 0.00 East Espola E7 25.0 point107 107 4,217.4 848.5 0.00 Average point22 22 2,534.3 854.5 0.00C:\TNM25\PROJECTS\THE FARM\Near Opening Day 418 J
INPUT: TRAFFIC FOR LAeq1h VolumesThe FarmDudek 18 June 2019 CB TNM 2.5 INPUT: TRAFFIC FOR LAeq1h Volumes PROJECT/CONTRACT:The Farm RUN:Near Opening Day Roadway PointsNameNameNo.SegmentAutos MTrucks HTrucks Buses Motorcycles VSVSVSVSVSveh/hr mph veh/hr mph veh/hr mph veh/hr mph veh/hr mph West Espola W7 point1 1105535 2235 1135 0 0 0 0 point2 2 East Espola W7 point3 3105535 2235 1135 0 0 0 0 point4 4 West Espola E7 point5 5 800 35 17 35 8 35 0 0 0 0 point6 6 800 35 17 35 8 35 0 0 0 0 point7 7 East Espola E10 point16 16 727 35 15 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point17 17 727 35 15 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point18 18 727 35 15 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point19 19 727 35 15 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point20 20 727 35 15 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point21 21 West Espola Rd E11 point23 23 615 35 13 35 6 35 0 0 0 0 point24 24 615 35 13 35 6 35 0 0 0 0 point25 25 615 35 13 35 6 35 0 0 0 0 point26 26 615 35 13 35 6 35 0 0 0 0 point27 27 615 35 13 35 6 35 0 0 0 0 point28 28 East Espola Rd E11 point29 29 615 35 13 35 6 35 0 0 0 0 point30 30 615 35 13 35 6 35 0 0 0 0 point31 31 615 35 13 35 6 35 0 0 0 0 point32 32 615 35 13 35 6 35 0 0 0 0C:\TNM25\PROJECTS\THE FARM\Near Opening Day 1
INPUT: TRAFFIC FOR LAeq1h VolumesThe Farm point33 33 615 35 13 35 6 35 0 0 0 0 point34 34 Cloudcroft Dr N10 point35 35 138 25 3 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point36 36 138 25 3 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point37 37 138 25 3 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point38 38 138 25 3 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point39 39 CloudCroft Dr N25 point40 40 45 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 point41 41 45 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 point42 42 45 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 point43 43 45 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 point44 44 45 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 point45 45 45 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 point46 46 45 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 point47 47 45 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 point48 48 45 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 point49 49 45 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 point50 50 45 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 point51 51 45 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 point52 52 45 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 point53 53 Tam O Shanter N24 point54 54 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point55 55 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point56 56 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point57 57 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point58 58 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point59 59 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point60 60 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point61 61 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point62 62 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point63 63 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point64 64 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point65 65 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point66 66 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point67 67 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point68 68 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0C:\TNM25\PROJECTS\THE FARM\Near Opening Day 2
INPUT: TRAFFIC FOR LAeq1h VolumesThe Farm point69 69 St Andrews Dr point70 70 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point72 72 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point73 73 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point74 74 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point75 75 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point76 76 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point77 77 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point78 78 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point79 79 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point80 80 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point81 81 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point82 82 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point83 83 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point84 84 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point85 85 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point86 86 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point87 87 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point88 88 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point89 89 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point90 90 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point91 91 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point92 92 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point93 93 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point94 94 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point95 95 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point96 96 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point97 97 154 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point71 71 Valley Verde Rd S8 point98 98 633 35 13 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point99 99 633 35 13 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point100 100 633 35 13 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point101 101 633 35 13 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point102 102 West Espola E10-2 point103 103 727 35 15 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point9 9 727 35 15 35 7 35 0 0 0 0C:\TNM25\PROJECTS\THE FARM\Near Opening Day 3
INPUT: TRAFFIC FOR LAeq1h VolumesThe Farm point10 10 727 35 15 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point11 11 727 35 15 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point12 12 727 35 15 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point13 13 727 35 15 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point14 14 727 35 15 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point15 15 East Espola E9 point104 104 729 35 15 35 8 35 0 0 0 0 point105 105 West Espola E9 point106 106 729 35 15 35 8 35 0 0 0 0 point8 8 East Espola E7 point107 107 800 35 17 35 8 35 0 0 0 0 point22 22C:\TNM25\PROJECTS\THE FARM\Near Opening Day 4
INPUT: RECEIVERSThe FarmDudek 18 June 2019 CB TNM 2.5 INPUT: RECEIVERS PROJECT/CONTRACT:The Farm RUN:Near Opening Day ReceiverNameNo.#DUsCoordinates (ground)HeightInput Sound Levels and Criteria ActiveXYZaboveExistingImpact Criteria NRinGroundLAeq1hLAeq1hSub'lGoalCalc.ft ft ft ft dBA dBA dB dB ST1 1 1 4,228.2 801.6 0.00 4.92 64.00 66 10.0 8.0Y ST4 2 1 5,679.8 2,346.1 0.00 4.92 52.50 66 10.0 8.0Y ST2 3 1 4,384.1 3,690.0 0.00 4.92 43.10 66 10.0 8.0Y ST3 4 1 6,696.9 5,901.7 0.00 4.92 42.20 66 10.0 8.0Y C:\TNM25\PROJECTS\THE FARM\Near Opening Day 1
RESULTS: SOUND LEVELSThe FarmDudek 19 June 2019 CB TNM 2.5 Calculated with TNM 2.5 RESULTS: SOUND LEVELS PROJECT/CONTRACT: The Farm RUN: Near Opening Day + Project BARRIER DESIGN: INPUT HEIGHTS Average pavement type shall be used unless a State highway agency substantiates the use ATMOSPHERICS: 68 deg F, 50% RH of a different type with approval of FHWA.ReceiverNameNo.#DUsExistingNo BarrierWith BarrierLAeq1hLAeq1h Increase over existing TypeCalculatedNoise ReductionCalculatedCrit'nCalculatedCrit'nImpactLAeq1hCalculatedGoalCalculatedSub'l IncminusGoaldBA dBA dBA dB dB dBA dB dB dB ST1 1 1 64.0 66.2 66 2.2 10 Snd Lvl66.2 0.0 8 -8.0 ST4 2 1 52.5 50.1 66 -2.4 10 ----50.1 0.0 8 -8.0 ST2 3 1 43.1 44.1 66 1.0 10 ----44.1 0.0 8 -8.0 ST3 4 1 42.2 52.7 66 10.5 10 Sub'l Inc52.7 0.0 8 -8.0 Dwelling Units # DUs Noise Reduction Min Avg Max dB dB dB All Selected40.0 0.00.0 All Impacted20.0 0.00.0 All that meet NR Goal00.0 0.00.0C:\TNM25\Projects\The Farm\Near Opening Day + Project 119 June 2019
INPUT: ROADWAYSThe FarmDudek 19 June 2019 CB TNM 2.5 INPUT: ROADWAYS Average pavement type shall be used unlessPROJECT/CONTRACT:The Farm a State highway agency substantiates the useRUN:Near Opening Day + Project of a different type with the approval of FHWARoadwayPointsNameWidthNameNo.Coordinates (pavement)Flow ControlSegmentXYZControlSpeedPercentPvmtOnDeviceConstraintVehiclesTypeStruct?Affectedft ft ft ft mph % West Espola W7 25.0 point1 1 1,271.9 885.2 0.00 Average point2 2 2,478.0 878.0 0.00 East Espola W7 25.0 point3 3 1,280.9 858.1 0.00 Average point4 4 2,474.4 858.1 0.00 West Espola E7 25.0 point5 5 2,528.5 878.0 0.00 Average point6 6 3,716.5 870.8 0.00 Average point7 7 4,221.3 865.1 0.00 East Espola E10 25.0 point16 16 7,502.8 683.3 0.00 Average point17 17 7,008.8 744.6 0.00 Average point18 18 6,756.4 773.4 0.00 Average point19 19 6,487.8 807.6 0.00 Average point20 20 5,563.4 826.3 0.00 Average point21 21 4,939.7 842.5 0.00 West Espola Rd E11 30.0 point23 23 7,568.0 693.5 0.00 Average point24 24 8,069.2 634.1 0.00 Average point25 25 8,274.7 605.2 0.00 Average point26 26 8,545.2 484.4 0.00 Average point27 27 8,748.9 322.1 0.00 Average point28 28 8,947.2 46.3 0.00 East Espola Rd E11 30.0 point29 29 8,897.8 43.3 0.00 Average point30 30 8,739.1 286.6 0.00 Average point31 31 8,627.4 391.2 0.00 Average point32 32 8,338.9 549.9 0.00 Average point33 33 8,077.5 607.5 0.00 Average point34 34 7,576.3 658.0 0.00C:\TNM25\Projects\The Farm\Near Opening Day + Project 119 J
INPUT: ROADWAYSThe Farm Cloudcroft Dr N10 40.0 point35 35 4,949.1 887.8 0.00 Average point36 36 4,949.1 1,875.6 0.00 Average point37 37 4,944.7 2,055.4 0.00 Average point38 38 4,958.0 2,146.5 0.00 Average point39 39 5,022.4 2,233.0 0.00 CloudCroft Dr N25 40.0 point40 40 5,051.2 2,253.0 0.00 Average point41 41 5,137.8 2,295.2 0.00 Average point42 42 5,197.7 2,312.9 0.00 Average point43 43 6,201.1 2,293.0 0.00 Average point44 44 6,250.0 2,295.2 0.00 Average point45 45 6,245.5 2,506.1 0.00 Average point46 46 6,238.9 2,721.4 0.00 Average point47 47 6,181.2 2,938.9 0.00 Average point48 48 6,056.8 3,087.7 0.00 Average point49 49 5,894.8 3,196.5 0.00 Average point50 50 5,726.1 3,271.9 0.00 Average point51 51 5,424.2 3,287.5 0.00 Average point52 52 5,180.0 3,316.3 0.00 Average point53 53 5,111.2 3,371.8 0.00 Tam O Shanter N24 40.0 point54 54 5,093.4 3,380.7 0.00 Average point55 55 5,013.5 3,525.0 0.00 Average point56 56 4,995.7 3,558.3 0.00 Average point57 57 4,953.6 3,818.0 0.00 Average point58 58 4,933.6 4,008.9 0.00 Average point59 59 4,935.8 4,142.1 0.00 Average point60 60 4,962.4 4,337.5 0.00 Average point61 61 4,995.7 4,523.9 0.00 Average point62 62 5,042.4 4,617.2 0.00 Average point63 63 5,075.7 4,674.9 0.00 Average point64 64 5,162.2 4,732.6 0.00 Average point65 65 5,262.1 4,748.1 0.00 Average point66 66 6,012.4 4,743.7 0.00 Average point67 67 6,687.3 4,748.1 0.00 Average point68 68 6,760.5 4,757.0 0.00 Average point69 69 6,913.7 5,098.9 0.00 St Andrews Dr 40.0 point70 70 6,922.6 5,132.2 0.00 Average point72 72 7,026.9 5,416.3 0.00 Average point73 73 7,035.8 5,496.2 0.00 Average point74 74 6,971.4 5,689.4 0.00 Average C:\TNM25\Projects\The Farm\Near Opening Day + Project 219 J
INPUT: ROADWAYSThe Farm point75 75 6,878.2 5,778.1 0.00 Average point76 76 6,753.9 5,842.5 0.00 Average point77 77 6,536.3 5,849.2 0.00 Average point78 78 4,891.4 5,824.8 0.00 Average point79 79 4,682.7 5,793.7 0.00 Average point80 80 4,471.9 5,691.6 0.00 Average point81 81 4,318.7 5,556.2 0.00 Average point82 82 4,178.8 5,387.5 0.00 Average point83 83 4,138.9 5,325.3 0.00 Average point84 84 4,078.9 5,163.3 0.00 Average point85 85 4,050.1 5,036.7 0.00 Average point86 86 4,041.2 4,273.1 0.00 Average point87 87 4,014.6 3,542.7 0.00 Average point88 88 4,012.3 2,583.8 0.00 Average point89 89 4,007.9 2,328.5 0.00 Average point90 90 4,005.7 2,146.5 0.00 Average point91 91 3,992.4 2,051.0 0.00 Average point92 92 3,916.9 1,911.2 0.00 Average point93 93 3,834.7 1,824.6 0.00 Average point94 94 3,739.3 1,766.9 0.00 Average point95 95 3,248.7 1,524.9 0.00 Average point96 96 3,084.4 1,462.7 0.00 Average point97 97 3,033.4 1,458.3 0.00 Average point71 71 2,551.7 1,449.4 0.00 Valley Verde Rd S8 50.0 point98 98 2,503.3 907.8 0.00 Average point99 99 2,505.5 1,009.9 0.00 Average point100 100 2,518.8 1,125.3 0.00 Average point101 101 2,518.8 1,229.7 0.00 Average point102 102 2,521.0 1,447.2 0.00 West Espola E10-2 25.0 point103 103 4,949.3 861.1 0.00 Average point9 9 5,541.0 850.9 0.00 Average point10 10 5,957.4 841.9 0.00 Average point11 11 6,489.2 825.7 0.00 Average point12 12 6,871.5 780.6 0.00 Average point13 13 7,105.8 748.2 0.00 Average point14 14 7,484.4 704.9 0.00 Average point15 15 7,515.1 701.3 0.00 East Espola E9 25.0 point104 104 4,939.7 842.5 0.00 Average point105 105 4,217.4 848.5 0.00C:\TNM25\Projects\The Farm\Near Opening Day + Project 319 J
INPUT: ROADWAYSThe Farm West Espola E9 25.0 point106 106 4,221.3 865.1 0.00 Average point8 8 4,949.3 861.1 0.00 East Espola E7 25.0 point107 107 4,217.4 848.5 0.00 Average point22 22 2,534.3 854.5 0.00 Road A 30.0 point108 108 4,148.8 960.2 0.00 Average point109 109 4,163.7 1,391.9 0.00 Average point110 110 4,170.4 1,438.4 0.00 Average point111 111 4,358.0 1,639.3 0.00 Average point112 112 4,446.0 1,733.9 0.00 Average point113 113 4,467.6 2,595.6 0.00 Average point114 114 4,479.2 2,652.1 0.00 Average point115 115 4,542.3 2,738.4 0.00 Average point116 116 4,628.6 2,821.5 0.00 Average point117 117 4,847.8 3,042.3 0.00 Average point118 118 4,905.9 3,131.9 0.00 Average point119 119 4,915.9 3,331.2 0.00 Average point120 120 5,010.5 3,455.7 0.00 Road E 30.0 point121 121 4,889.3 3,342.8 0.00 Average point122 122 4,685.1 3,417.5 0.00 Average point123 123 4,617.0 3,457.3 0.00 Average point124 124 4,573.9 3,540.4 0.00 Average point125 125 4,578.8 3,621.7 0.00 Average point126 126 4,588.8 3,742.9 0.00 Average point127 127 4,582.2 3,829.3 0.00 Average point128 128 4,540.6 3,952.1 0.00 Average point129 129 4,530.7 4,020.2 0.00 Average point130 130 4,567.2 4,199.5 0.00 Average point131 131 4,632.0 4,344.0 0.00 Average point132 132 4,658.5 4,475.2 0.00 Average point133 133 4,691.7 4,734.2 0.00 Average point134 134 4,748.2 4,820.5 0.00 Average point135 135 4,891.0 4,920.1 0.00 Average point136 136 5,017.2 4,941.7 0.00 Average point137 137 5,561.8 4,955.0 0.00 Average point138 138 5,736.1 5,013.1 0.00 Average point139 139 5,820.8 5,049.6 0.00 Average point140 140 6,406.9 5,048.0 0.00 Average point141 141 6,773.8 4,968.3 0.00 Average point142 142 6,813.7 4,956.7 0.00C:\TNM25\Projects\The Farm\Near Opening Day + Project 419 J
INPUT: TRAFFIC FOR LAeq1h VolumesThe FarmDudek 19 June 2019 CB TNM 2.5 INPUT: TRAFFIC FOR LAeq1h Volumes PROJECT/CONTRACT:The Farm RUN:Near Opening Day + Project Roadway PointsNameNameNo.SegmentAutos MTrucks HTrucks Buses Motorcycles VSVSVSVSVSveh/hr mph veh/hr mph veh/hr mph veh/hr mph veh/hr mph West Espola W7 point1 1114135 2435 1235 0 0 0 0 point2 2 East Espola W7 point3 3114135 2435 1235 0 0 0 0 point4 4 West Espola E7 point5 5 884 35 18 35 9 35 0 0 0 0 point6 6 884 35 18 35 9 35 0 0 0 0 point7 7 East Espola E10 point16 16 758 35 16 35 8 35 0 0 0 0 point17 17 758 35 16 35 8 35 0 0 0 0 point18 18 758 35 16 35 8 35 0 0 0 0 point19 19 758 35 16 35 8 35 0 0 0 0 point20 20 758 35 16 35 8 35 0 0 0 0 point21 21 West Espola Rd E11 point23 23 647 35 13 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point24 24 647 35 13 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point25 25 647 35 13 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point26 26 647 35 13 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point27 27 647 35 13 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point28 28 East Espola Rd E11 point29 29 647 35 13 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point30 30 647 35 13 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point31 31 647 35 13 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point32 32 647 35 13 35 7 35 0 0 0 0C:\TNM25\Projects\The Farm\Near Opening Day + Project 1
INPUT: TRAFFIC FOR LAeq1h VolumesThe Farm point33 33 647 35 13 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point34 34 Cloudcroft Dr N10 point35 35 145 25 3 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point36 36 145 25 3 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point37 37 145 25 3 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point38 38 145 25 3 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point39 39 CloudCroft Dr N25 point40 40 50 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point41 41 50 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point42 42 50 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point43 43 50 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point44 44 50 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point45 45 50 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point46 46 50 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point47 47 50 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point48 48 50 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point49 49 50 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point50 50 50 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point51 51 50 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point52 52 50 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point53 53 Tam O Shanter N24 point54 54 157 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point55 55 157 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point56 56 157 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point57 57 157 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point58 58 157 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point59 59 157 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point60 60 157 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point61 61 157 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point62 62 157 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point63 63 157 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point64 64 157 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point65 65 157 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point66 66 157 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point67 67 157 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point68 68 157 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0C:\TNM25\Projects\The Farm\Near Opening Day + Project 2
INPUT: TRAFFIC FOR LAeq1h VolumesThe Farm point69 69 St Andrews Dr point70 70 159 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point72 72 159 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point73 73 159 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point74 74 159 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point75 75 159 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point76 76 159 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point77 77 159 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point78 78 159 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point79 79 159 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point80 80 159 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point81 81 159 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point82 82 159 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point83 83 159 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point84 84 159 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point85 85 159 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point86 86 159 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point87 87 159 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point88 88 159 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point89 89 159 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point90 90 159 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point91 91 159 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point92 92 159 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point93 93 159 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point94 94 159 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point95 95 159 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point96 96 159 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point97 97 159 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point71 71 Valley Verde Rd S8 point98 98 638 35 13 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point99 99 638 35 13 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point100 100 638 35 13 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point101 101 638 35 13 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point102 102 West Espola E10-2 point103 103 758 35 16 35 8 35 0 0 0 0 point9 9 758 35 16 35 8 35 0 0 0 0C:\TNM25\Projects\The Farm\Near Opening Day + Project 3
INPUT: TRAFFIC FOR LAeq1h VolumesThe Farm point10 10 758 35 16 35 8 35 0 0 0 0 point11 11 758 35 16 35 8 35 0 0 0 0 point12 12 758 35 16 35 8 35 0 0 0 0 point13 13 758 35 16 35 8 35 0 0 0 0 point14 14 758 35 16 35 8 35 0 0 0 0 point15 15 East Espola E9 point104 104 757 35 16 35 8 35 0 0 0 0 point105 105 West Espola E9 point106 106 757 35 16 35 8 35 0 0 0 0 point8 8 East Espola E7 point107 107 884 35 18 35 9 35 0 0 0 0 point22 22 Road A point108 108 233 25 5 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point109 109 233 25 5 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point110 110 233 25 5 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point111 111 233 25 5 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point112 112 233 25 5 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point113 113 233 25 5 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point114 114 233 25 5 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point115 115 233 25 5 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point116 116 233 25 5 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point117 117 233 25 5 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point118 118 233 25 5 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point119 119 233 25 5 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point120 120 Road E point121 121 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point122 122 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point123 123 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point124 124 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point125 125 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point126 126 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point127 127 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point128 128 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point129 129 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point130 130 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point131 131 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0C:\TNM25\Projects\The Farm\Near Opening Day + Project 4
INPUT: TRAFFIC FOR LAeq1h VolumesThe Farm point132 132 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point133 133 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point134 134 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point1350 49251251250000 point136 136 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point137 137 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point138 138 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point139 139 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point140 140 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point141 141 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point142 142C:\TNM25\Projects\The Farm\Near Opening Day + Project 5
INPUT: RECEIVERSThe FarmDudek 19 June 2019 CB TNM 2.5 INPUT: RECEIVERS PROJECT/CONTRACT:The Farm RUN:Near Opening Day + Project ReceiverNameNo.#DUsCoordinates (ground)HeightInput Sound Levels and Criteria ActiveXYZaboveExistingImpact Criteria NRinGroundLAeq1hLAeq1hSub'lGoalCalc.ft ft ft ft dBA dBA dB dB ST1 1 1 4,228.2 801.6 0.00 4.92 64.00 66 10.0 8.0Y ST4 2 1 5,679.8 2,346.1 0.00 4.92 52.50 66 10.0 8.0Y ST2 3 1 4,384.1 3,690.0 0.00 4.92 43.10 66 10.0 8.0Y ST3 4 1 6,696.9 5,901.7 0.00 4.92 42.20 66 10.0 8.0Y C:\TNM25\Projects\The Farm\Near Opening Day + Project 1
RESULTS: SOUND LEVELSThe FarmDudek 18 June 2019 CB TNM 2.5 Calculated with TNM 2.5 RESULTS: SOUND LEVELS PROJECT/CONTRACT: The Farm RUN: Horizon Year without Project BARRIER DESIGN: INPUT HEIGHTS Average pavement type shall be used unless a State highway agency substantiates the use ATMOSPHERICS: 68 deg F, 50% RH of a different type with approval of FHWA.ReceiverNameNo.#DUsExistingNo BarrierWith BarrierLAeq1hLAeq1h Increase over existing TypeCalculatedNoise ReductionCalculatedCrit'nCalculatedCrit'nImpactLAeq1hCalculatedGoalCalculatedSub'l IncminusGoaldBA dBA dBA dB dB dBA dB dB dB ST1 1 1 64.0 66.9 66 2.9 10 Snd Lvl66.9 0.0 8 -8.0 ST4 2 1 52.5 48.3 66 -4.2 10 ----48.3 0.0 8 -8.0 ST2 3 1 43.1 41.4 66 -1.7 10 ----41.4 0.0 8 -8.0 ST3 4 1 42.2 52.8 66 10.6 10 Sub'l Inc52.8 0.0 8 -8.0 Dwelling Units # DUs Noise Reduction Min Avg Max dB dB dB All Selected40.0 0.00.0 All Impacted20.0 0.00.0 All that meet NR Goal00.0 0.00.0C:\TNM25\PROJECTS\THE FARM\Horizon Year no project 118 June 2019
INPUT: ROADWAYSThe FarmDudek 18 June 2019 CB TNM 2.5 INPUT: ROADWAYS Average pavement type shall be used unlessPROJECT/CONTRACT:The Farm a State highway agency substantiates the useRUN:Horizon Year without Project of a different type with the approval of FHWARoadwayPointsNameWidthNameNo.Coordinates (pavement)Flow ControlSegmentXYZControlSpeedPercentPvmtOnDeviceConstraintVehiclesTypeStruct?Affectedft ft ft ft mph % West Espola W7 25.0 point1 1 1,271.9 885.2 0.00 Average point2 2 2,478.0 878.0 0.00 East Espola W7 25.0 point3 3 1,280.9 858.1 0.00 Average point4 4 2,474.4 858.1 0.00 West Espola E7 25.0 point5 5 2,528.5 878.0 0.00 Average point6 6 3,716.5 870.8 0.00 Average point7 7 4,221.3 865.1 0.00 East Espola E10 25.0 point16 16 7,502.8 683.3 0.00 Average point17 17 7,008.8 744.6 0.00 Average point18 18 6,756.4 773.4 0.00 Average point19 19 6,487.8 807.6 0.00 Average point20 20 5,563.4 826.3 0.00 Average point21 21 4,939.7 842.5 0.00 West Espola Rd E11 30.0 point23 23 7,568.0 693.5 0.00 Average point24 24 8,069.2 634.1 0.00 Average point25 25 8,274.7 605.2 0.00 Average point26 26 8,545.2 484.4 0.00 Average point27 27 8,748.9 322.1 0.00 Average point28 28 8,947.2 46.3 0.00 East Espola Rd E11 30.0 point29 29 8,897.8 43.3 0.00 Average point30 30 8,739.1 286.6 0.00 Average point31 31 8,627.4 391.2 0.00 Average point32 32 8,338.9 549.9 0.00 Average point33 33 8,077.5 607.5 0.00 Average point34 34 7,576.3 658.0 0.00C:\TNM25\PROJECTS\THE FARM\Horizon Year no project 118 J
INPUT: ROADWAYSThe Farm Cloudcroft Dr N10 40.0 point35 35 4,949.1 887.8 0.00 Average point36 36 4,949.1 1,875.6 0.00 Average point37 37 4,944.7 2,055.4 0.00 Average point38 38 4,958.0 2,146.5 0.00 Average point39 39 5,022.4 2,233.0 0.00 CloudCroft Dr N25 40.0 point40 40 5,051.2 2,253.0 0.00 Average point41 41 5,137.8 2,295.2 0.00 Average point42 42 5,197.7 2,312.9 0.00 Average point43 43 6,201.1 2,293.0 0.00 Average point44 44 6,250.0 2,295.2 0.00 Average point45 45 6,245.5 2,506.1 0.00 Average point46 46 6,238.9 2,721.4 0.00 Average point47 47 6,181.2 2,938.9 0.00 Average point48 48 6,056.8 3,087.7 0.00 Average point49 49 5,894.8 3,196.5 0.00 Average point50 50 5,726.1 3,271.9 0.00 Average point51 51 5,424.2 3,287.5 0.00 Average point52 52 5,180.0 3,316.3 0.00 Average point53 53 5,111.2 3,371.8 0.00 Tam O Shanter N24 40.0 point54 54 5,093.4 3,380.7 0.00 Average point55 55 5,013.5 3,525.0 0.00 Average point56 56 4,995.7 3,558.3 0.00 Average point57 57 4,953.6 3,818.0 0.00 Average point58 58 4,933.6 4,008.9 0.00 Average point59 59 4,935.8 4,142.1 0.00 Average point60 60 4,962.4 4,337.5 0.00 Average point61 61 4,995.7 4,523.9 0.00 Average point62 62 5,042.4 4,617.2 0.00 Average point63 63 5,075.7 4,674.9 0.00 Average point64 64 5,162.2 4,732.6 0.00 Average point65 65 5,262.1 4,748.1 0.00 Average point66 66 6,012.4 4,743.7 0.00 Average point67 67 6,687.3 4,748.1 0.00 Average point68 68 6,760.5 4,757.0 0.00 Average point69 69 6,913.7 5,098.9 0.00 St Andrews Dr 40.0 point70 70 6,922.6 5,132.2 0.00 Average point72 72 7,026.9 5,416.3 0.00 Average point73 73 7,035.8 5,496.2 0.00 Average point74 74 6,971.4 5,689.4 0.00 Average C:\TNM25\PROJECTS\THE FARM\Horizon Year no project 218 J
INPUT: ROADWAYSThe Farm point75 75 6,878.2 5,778.1 0.00 Average point76 76 6,753.9 5,842.5 0.00 Average point77 77 6,536.3 5,849.2 0.00 Average point78 78 4,891.4 5,824.8 0.00 Average point79 79 4,682.7 5,793.7 0.00 Average point80 80 4,471.9 5,691.6 0.00 Average point81 81 4,318.7 5,556.2 0.00 Average point82 82 4,178.8 5,387.5 0.00 Average point83 83 4,138.9 5,325.3 0.00 Average point84 84 4,078.9 5,163.3 0.00 Average point85 85 4,050.1 5,036.7 0.00 Average point86 86 4,041.2 4,273.1 0.00 Average point87 87 4,014.6 3,542.7 0.00 Average point88 88 4,012.3 2,583.8 0.00 Average point89 89 4,007.9 2,328.5 0.00 Average point90 90 4,005.7 2,146.5 0.00 Average point91 91 3,992.4 2,051.0 0.00 Average point92 92 3,916.9 1,911.2 0.00 Average point93 93 3,834.7 1,824.6 0.00 Average point94 94 3,739.3 1,766.9 0.00 Average point95 95 3,248.7 1,524.9 0.00 Average point96 96 3,084.4 1,462.7 0.00 Average point97 97 3,033.4 1,458.3 0.00 Average point71 71 2,551.7 1,449.4 0.00 Valley Verde Rd S8 50.0 point98 98 2,503.3 907.8 0.00 Average point99 99 2,505.5 1,009.9 0.00 Average point100 100 2,518.8 1,125.3 0.00 Average point101 101 2,518.8 1,229.7 0.00 Average point102 102 2,521.0 1,447.2 0.00 West Espola E10-2 25.0 point103 103 4,949.3 861.1 0.00 Average point9 9 5,541.0 850.9 0.00 Average point10 10 5,957.4 841.9 0.00 Average point11 11 6,489.2 825.7 0.00 Average point12 12 6,871.5 780.6 0.00 Average point13 13 7,105.8 748.2 0.00 Average point14 14 7,484.4 704.9 0.00 Average point15 15 7,515.1 701.3 0.00 East Espola E9 25.0 point104 104 4,939.7 842.5 0.00 Average point105 105 4,217.4 848.5 0.00C:\TNM25\PROJECTS\THE FARM\Horizon Year no project 318 J
INPUT: ROADWAYSThe Farm West Espola E9 25.0 point106 106 4,221.3 865.1 0.00 Average point8 8 4,949.3 861.1 0.00 East Espola E7 25.0 point107 107 4,217.4 848.5 0.00 Average point22 22 2,534.3 854.5 0.00C:\TNM25\PROJECTS\THE FARM\Horizon Year no project 418 J
INPUT: TRAFFIC FOR LAeq1h VolumesThe FarmDudek 18 June 2019 CB TNM 2.5 INPUT: TRAFFIC FOR LAeq1h Volumes PROJECT/CONTRACT:The Farm RUN:Horizon Year without Project Roadway PointsNameNameNo.SegmentAutos MTrucks HTrucks Buses Motorcycles VSVSVSVSVSveh/hr mph veh/hr mph veh/hr mph veh/hr mph veh/hr mph West Espola W7 point1 1126135 2635 1335 0 0 0 0 point2 2 East Espola W7 point3 3126135 2635 1335 0 0 0 0 point4 4 West Espola E7 point5 5100435 2135 1035 0 0 0 0 point6 6100435 2135 1035 0 0 0 0 point7 7 East Espola E10 point16 16 912 35 19 35 9 35 0 0 0 0 point17 17 912 35 19 35 9 35 0 0 0 0 point18 18 912 35 19 35 9 35 0 0 0 0 point19 19 912 35 19 35 9 35 0 0 0 0 point20 20 912 35 19 35 9 35 0 0 0 0 point21 21 West Espola Rd E11 point23 23 773 35 16 35 8 35 0 0 0 0 point24 24 773 35 16 35 8 35 0 0 0 0 point25 25 773 35 16 35 8 35 0 0 0 0 point26 26 773 35 16 35 8 35 0 0 0 0 point27 27 773 35 16 35 8 35 0 0 0 0 point28 28 East Espola Rd E11 point29 29 773 35 16 35 8 35 0 0 0 0 point30 30 773 35 16 35 8 35 0 0 0 0 point31 31 773 35 16 35 8 35 0 0 0 0 point32 32 773 35 16 35 8 35 0 0 0 0C:\TNM25\PROJECTS\THE FARM\Horizon Year no project 1
INPUT: TRAFFIC FOR LAeq1h VolumesThe Farm point33 33 773 35 16 35 8 35 0 0 0 0 point34 34 Cloudcroft Dr N10 point35 35 140 25 3 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point36 36 140 25 3 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point37 37 140 25 3 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point38 38 140 25 3 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point39 39 CloudCroft Dr N25 point40 40 48 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 point41 41 48 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 point42 42 48 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 point43 43 48 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 point44 44 48 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 point45 45 48 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 point46 46 48 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 point47 47 48 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 point48 48 48 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 point49 49 48 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 point50 50 48 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 point51 51 48 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 point52 52 48 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 point53 53 Tam O Shanter N24 point54 54 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point55 55 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point56 56 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point57 57 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point58 58 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point59 59 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point60 60 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point61 61 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point62 62 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point63 63 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point64 64 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point65 65 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point66 66 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point67 67 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point68 68 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0C:\TNM25\PROJECTS\THE FARM\Horizon Year no project 2
INPUT: TRAFFIC FOR LAeq1h VolumesThe Farm point69 69 St Andrews Dr point70 70 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point72 72 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point73 73 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point74 74 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point75 75 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point76 76 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point77 77 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point78 78 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point79 79 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point80 80 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point81 81 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point82 82 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point83 83 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point84 84 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point85 85 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point86 86 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point87 87 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point88 88 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point89 89 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point90 90 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point91 91 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point92 92 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point93 93 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point94 94 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point95 95 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point96 96 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point97 97 164 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point71 71 Valley Verde Rd S8 point98 98 672 35 14 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point99 99 672 35 14 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point100 100 672 35 14 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point101 101 672 35 14 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point102 102 West Espola E10-2 point103 103 912 35 19 35 9 35 0 0 0 0 point9 9 912 35 19 35 9 35 0 0 0 0C:\TNM25\PROJECTS\THE FARM\Horizon Year no project 3
INPUT: TRAFFIC FOR LAeq1h VolumesThe Farm point10 10 912 35 19 35 9 35 0 0 0 0 point11 11 912 35 19 35 9 35 0 0 0 0 point12 12 912 35 19 35 9 35 0 0 0 0 point13 13 912 35 19 35 9 35 0 0 0 0 point14 14 912 35 19 35 9 35 0 0 0 0 point15 15 East Espola E9 point104 104 915 35 19 35 9 35 0 0 0 0 point105 105 West Espola E9 point106 106 915 35 19 35 9 35 0 0 0 0 point8 8 East Espola E7 point107 107 1004 35 21 35 10 35 0 0 0 0 point22 22C:\TNM25\PROJECTS\THE FARM\Horizon Year no project 4
INPUT: RECEIVERSThe FarmDudek 18 June 2019 CB TNM 2.5 INPUT: RECEIVERS PROJECT/CONTRACT:The Farm RUN:Horizon Year without Project ReceiverNameNo.#DUsCoordinates (ground)HeightInput Sound Levels and Criteria ActiveXYZaboveExistingImpact Criteria NRinGroundLAeq1hLAeq1hSub'lGoalCalc.ft ft ft ft dBA dBA dB dB ST1 1 1 4,228.2 801.6 0.00 4.92 64.00 66 10.0 8.0Y ST4 2 1 5,679.8 2,346.1 0.00 4.92 52.50 66 10.0 8.0Y ST2 3 1 4,384.1 3,690.0 0.00 4.92 43.10 66 10.0 8.0Y ST3 4 1 6,696.9 5,901.7 0.00 4.92 42.20 66 10.0 8.0Y C:\TNM25\PROJECTS\THE FARM\Horizon Year no project 1
RESULTS: SOUND LEVELSThe FarmDudek 19 June 2019 CB TNM 2.5 Calculated with TNM 2.5 RESULTS: SOUND LEVELS PROJECT/CONTRACT: The Farm RUN: Horizon Year With Project BARRIER DESIGN: INPUT HEIGHTS Average pavement type shall be used unless a State highway agency substantiates the use ATMOSPHERICS: 68 deg F, 50% RH of a different type with approval of FHWA.ReceiverNameNo.#DUsExistingNo BarrierWith BarrierLAeq1hLAeq1h Increase over existing TypeCalculatedNoise ReductionCalculatedCrit'nCalculatedCrit'nImpactLAeq1hCalculatedGoalCalculatedSub'l IncminusGoaldBA dBA dBA dB dB dBA dB dB dB ST1 1 1 64.0 67.1 66 3.1 10 Snd Lvl67.1 0.0 8 -8.0 ST4 2 1 52.5 50.3 66 -2.2 10 ----50.3 0.0 8 -8.0 ST2 3 1 43.1 44.3 66 1.2 10 ----44.3 0.0 8 -8.0 ST3 4 1 42.2 52.8 66 10.6 10 Sub'l Inc52.8 0.0 8 -8.0 Dwelling Units # DUs Noise Reduction Min Avg Max dB dB dB All Selected40.0 0.00.0 All Impacted20.0 0.00.0 All that meet NR Goal00.0 0.00.0C:\TNM25\Projects\The Farm\Horizon Year with Project 119 June 2019
INPUT: ROADWAYSThe FarmDudek 19 June 2019 CB TNM 2.5 INPUT: ROADWAYS Average pavement type shall be used unlessPROJECT/CONTRACT:The Farm a State highway agency substantiates the useRUN:Horizon Year With Project of a different type with the approval of FHWARoadwayPointsNameWidthNameNo.Coordinates (pavement)Flow ControlSegmentXYZControlSpeedPercentPvmtOnDeviceConstraintVehiclesTypeStruct?Affectedft ft ft ft mph % West Espola W7 25.0 point1 1 1,271.9 885.2 0.00 Average point2 2 2,478.0 878.0 0.00 East Espola W7 25.0 point3 3 1,280.9 858.1 0.00 Average point4 4 2,474.4 858.1 0.00 West Espola E7 25.0 point5 5 2,528.5 878.0 0.00 Average point6 6 3,716.5 870.8 0.00 Average point7 7 4,221.3 865.1 0.00 East Espola E10 25.0 point16 16 7,502.8 683.3 0.00 Average point17 17 7,008.8 744.6 0.00 Average point18 18 6,756.4 773.4 0.00 Average point19 19 6,487.8 807.6 0.00 Average point20 20 5,563.4 826.3 0.00 Average point21 21 4,939.7 842.5 0.00 West Espola Rd E11 30.0 point23 23 7,568.0 693.5 0.00 Average point24 24 8,069.2 634.1 0.00 Average point25 25 8,274.7 605.2 0.00 Average point26 26 8,545.2 484.4 0.00 Average point27 27 8,748.9 322.1 0.00 Average point28 28 8,947.2 46.3 0.00 East Espola Rd E11 30.0 point29 29 8,897.8 43.3 0.00 Average point30 30 8,739.1 286.6 0.00 Average point31 31 8,627.4 391.2 0.00 Average point32 32 8,338.9 549.9 0.00 Average point33 33 8,077.5 607.5 0.00 Average point34 34 7,576.3 658.0 0.00C:\TNM25\Projects\The Farm\Horizon Year with Project 119 J
INPUT: ROADWAYSThe Farm Cloudcroft Dr N10 40.0 point35 35 4,949.1 887.8 0.00 Average point36 36 4,949.1 1,875.6 0.00 Average point37 37 4,944.7 2,055.4 0.00 Average point38 38 4,958.0 2,146.5 0.00 Average point39 39 5,022.4 2,233.0 0.00 CloudCroft Dr N25 40.0 point40 40 5,051.2 2,253.0 0.00 Average point41 41 5,137.8 2,295.2 0.00 Average point42 42 5,197.7 2,312.9 0.00 Average point43 43 6,201.1 2,293.0 0.00 Average point44 44 6,250.0 2,295.2 0.00 Average point45 45 6,245.5 2,506.1 0.00 Average point46 46 6,238.9 2,721.4 0.00 Average point47 47 6,181.2 2,938.9 0.00 Average point48 48 6,056.8 3,087.7 0.00 Average point49 49 5,894.8 3,196.5 0.00 Average point50 50 5,726.1 3,271.9 0.00 Average point51 51 5,424.2 3,287.5 0.00 Average point52 52 5,180.0 3,316.3 0.00 Average point53 53 5,111.2 3,371.8 0.00 Tam O Shanter N24 40.0 point54 54 5,093.4 3,380.7 0.00 Average point55 55 5,013.5 3,525.0 0.00 Average point56 56 4,995.7 3,558.3 0.00 Average point57 57 4,953.6 3,818.0 0.00 Average point58 58 4,933.6 4,008.9 0.00 Average point59 59 4,935.8 4,142.1 0.00 Average point60 60 4,962.4 4,337.5 0.00 Average point61 61 4,995.7 4,523.9 0.00 Average point62 62 5,042.4 4,617.2 0.00 Average point63 63 5,075.7 4,674.9 0.00 Average point64 64 5,162.2 4,732.6 0.00 Average point65 65 5,262.1 4,748.1 0.00 Average point66 66 6,012.4 4,743.7 0.00 Average point67 67 6,687.3 4,748.1 0.00 Average point68 68 6,760.5 4,757.0 0.00 Average point69 69 6,913.7 5,098.9 0.00 St Andrews Dr 40.0 point70 70 6,922.6 5,132.2 0.00 Average point72 72 7,026.9 5,416.3 0.00 Average point73 73 7,035.8 5,496.2 0.00 Average point74 74 6,971.4 5,689.4 0.00 Average C:\TNM25\Projects\The Farm\Horizon Year with Project 219 J
INPUT: ROADWAYSThe Farm point75 75 6,878.2 5,778.1 0.00 Average point76 76 6,753.9 5,842.5 0.00 Average point77 77 6,536.3 5,849.2 0.00 Average point78 78 4,891.4 5,824.8 0.00 Average point79 79 4,682.7 5,793.7 0.00 Average point80 80 4,471.9 5,691.6 0.00 Average point81 81 4,318.7 5,556.2 0.00 Average point82 82 4,178.8 5,387.5 0.00 Average point83 83 4,138.9 5,325.3 0.00 Average point84 84 4,078.9 5,163.3 0.00 Average point85 85 4,050.1 5,036.7 0.00 Average point86 86 4,041.2 4,273.1 0.00 Average point87 87 4,014.6 3,542.7 0.00 Average point88 88 4,012.3 2,583.8 0.00 Average point89 89 4,007.9 2,328.5 0.00 Average point90 90 4,005.7 2,146.5 0.00 Average point91 91 3,992.4 2,051.0 0.00 Average point92 92 3,916.9 1,911.2 0.00 Average point93 93 3,834.7 1,824.6 0.00 Average point94 94 3,739.3 1,766.9 0.00 Average point95 95 3,248.7 1,524.9 0.00 Average point96 96 3,084.4 1,462.7 0.00 Average point97 97 3,033.4 1,458.3 0.00 Average point71 71 2,551.7 1,449.4 0.00 Valley Verde Rd S8 50.0 point98 98 2,503.3 907.8 0.00 Average point99 99 2,505.5 1,009.9 0.00 Average point100 100 2,518.8 1,125.3 0.00 Average point101 101 2,518.8 1,229.7 0.00 Average point102 102 2,521.0 1,447.2 0.00 West Espola E10-2 25.0 point103 103 4,949.3 861.1 0.00 Average point9 9 5,541.0 850.9 0.00 Average point10 10 5,957.4 841.9 0.00 Average point11 11 6,489.2 825.7 0.00 Average point12 12 6,871.5 780.6 0.00 Average point13 13 7,105.8 748.2 0.00 Average point14 14 7,484.4 704.9 0.00 Average point15 15 7,515.1 701.3 0.00 East Espola E9 25.0 point104 104 4,939.7 842.5 0.00 Average point105 105 4,217.4 848.5 0.00C:\TNM25\Projects\The Farm\Horizon Year with Project 319 J
INPUT: ROADWAYSThe Farm West Espola E9 25.0 point106 106 4,221.3 865.1 0.00 Average point8 8 4,949.3 861.1 0.00 East Espola E7 25.0 point107 107 4,217.4 848.5 0.00 Average point22 22 2,534.3 854.5 0.00 Road E 30.0 point108 108 4,889.3 3,342.8 0.00 Average point110 110 4,685.1 3,417.5 0.00 Average point111 111 4,617.0 3,457.3 0.00 Average point112 112 4,573.9 3,540.4 0.00 Average point113 113 4,578.8 3,621.7 0.00 Average point114 114 4,588.8 3,742.9 0.00 Average point115 115 4,582.2 3,829.3 0.00 Average point116 116 4,540.6 3,952.1 0.00 Average point117 117 4,530.7 4,020.2 0.00 Average point118 118 4,567.2 4,199.5 0.00 Average point119 119 4,632.0 4,344.0 0.00 Average point120 120 4,658.5 4,475.2 0.00 Average point121 121 4,691.7 4,734.2 0.00 Average point122 122 4,748.2 4,820.5 0.00 Average point123 123 4,891.0 4,920.1 0.00 Average point124 124 5,017.2 4,941.7 0.00 Average point125 125 5,561.8 4,955.0 0.00 Average point126 126 5,736.1 5,013.1 0.00 Average point127 127 5,820.8 5,049.6 0.00 Average point128 128 6,406.9 5,048.0 0.00 Average point129 129 6,773.8 4,968.3 0.00 Average point109 109 6,813.7 4,956.7 0.00 Road A 30.0 point130 130 4,148.8 960.2 0.00 Average point132 132 4,163.7 1,391.9 0.00 Average point133 133 4,170.4 1,438.4 0.00 Average point134 134 4,358.0 1,639.3 0.00 Average point135 135 4,446.0 1,733.9 0.00 Average point136 136 4,467.6 2,595.6 0.00 Average point137 137 4,479.2 2,652.1 0.00 Average point138 138 4,542.3 2,738.4 0.00 Average point139 139 4,628.6 2,821.5 0.00 Average point140 140 4,847.8 3,042.3 0.00 Average point141 141 4,905.9 3,131.9 0.00 Average point142 142 4,915.9 3,331.2 0.00 Average point131 131 5,010.5 3,455.7 0.00C:\TNM25\Projects\The Farm\Horizon Year with Project 419 J
INPUT: TRAFFIC FOR LAeq1h VolumesThe FarmDudek 19 June 2019 CB TNM 2.5 INPUT: TRAFFIC FOR LAeq1h Volumes PROJECT/CONTRACT:The Farm RUN:Horizon Year With Project Roadway PointsNameNameNo.SegmentAutos MTrucks HTrucks Buses Motorcycles VSVSVSVSVSveh/hr mph veh/hr mph veh/hr mph veh/hr mph veh/hr mph West Espola W7 point1 1134735 2835 1435 0 0 0 0 point2 2 East Espola W7 point3 3134735 2835 1435 0 0 0 0 point4 4 West Espola E7 point5 5108835 2235 1135 0 0 0 0 point6 6108835 2235 1135 0 0 0 0 point7 7 East Espola E10 point16 16 944 35 19 35 10 35 0 0 0 0 point17 17 944 35 19 35 10 35 0 0 0 0 point18 18 944 35 19 35 10 35 0 0 0 0 point19 19 944 35 19 35 10 35 0 0 0 0 point20 20 944 35 19 35 10 35 0 0 0 0 point21 21 West Espola Rd E11 point23 23 804 35 17 35 8 35 0 0 0 0 point24 24 804 35 17 35 8 35 0 0 0 0 point25 25 804 35 17 35 8 35 0 0 0 0 point26 26 804 35 17 35 8 35 0 0 0 0 point27 27 804 35 17 35 8 35 0 0 0 0 point28 28 East Espola Rd E11 point29 29 804 35 17 35 8 35 0 0 0 0 point30 30 804 35 17 35 8 35 0 0 0 0 point31 31 804 35 17 35 8 35 0 0 0 0 point32 32 804 35 17 35 8 35 0 0 0 0C:\TNM25\Projects\The Farm\Horizon Year with Project 1
INPUT: TRAFFIC FOR LAeq1h VolumesThe Farm point33 33 804 35 17 35 8 35 0 0 0 0 point34 34 Cloudcroft Dr N10 point35 35 147 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point36 36 147 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point37 37 147 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point38 38 147 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point39 39 CloudCroft Dr N25 point40 40 52 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point41 41 52 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point42 42 52 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point43 43 52 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point44 44 52 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point45 45 52 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point46 46 52 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point47 47 52 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point48 48 52 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point49 49 52 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point50 50 52 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point51 51 52 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point52 52 52 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point53 53 Tam O Shanter N24 point54 54 166 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point55 55 166 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point56 56 166 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point57 57 166 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point58 58 166 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point59 59 166 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point60 60 166 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point61 61 166 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point62 62 166 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point63 63 166 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point64 64 166 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point65 65 166 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point66 66 166 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point67 67 166 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point68 68 166 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0C:\TNM25\Projects\The Farm\Horizon Year with Project 2
INPUT: TRAFFIC FOR LAeq1h VolumesThe Farm point69 69 St Andrews Dr point70 70 169 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point72 72 169 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point73 73 169 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point74 74 169 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point75 75 169 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point76 76 169 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point77 77 169 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point78 78 169 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point79 79 169 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point80 80 169 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point81 81 169 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point82 82 169 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point83 83 169 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point84 84 169 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point85 85 169 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point86 86 169 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point87 87 169 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point88 88 169 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point89 89 169 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point90 90 169 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point91 91 169 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point92 92 169 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point93 93 169 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point94 94 169 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point95 95 169 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point96 96 169 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point97 97 169 25 3 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point71 71 Valley Verde Rd S8 point98 98 677 35 14 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point99 99 677 35 14 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point100 100 677 35 14 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point101 101 677 35 14 35 7 35 0 0 0 0 point102 102 West Espola E10-2 point103 103 944 35 19 35 10 35 0 0 0 0 point9 9 94435 1935 1035 0 0 0 0C:\TNM25\Projects\The Farm\Horizon Year with Project 3
INPUT: TRAFFIC FOR LAeq1h VolumesThe Farm point10 10 944 35 19 35 10 35 0 0 0 0 point11 11 944 35 19 35 10 35 0 0 0 0 point12 12 944 35 19 35 10 35 0 0 0 0 point13 13 944 35 19 35 10 35 0 0 0 0 point14 14 944 35 19 35 10 35 0 0 0 0 point15 15 East Espola E9 point104 104 943 35 19 35 10 35 0 0 0 0 point105 105 West Espola E9 point106 106 943 35 19 35 10 35 0 0 0 0 point8 8 East Espola E7 point107 107 1088 35 22 35 11 35 0 0 0 0 point22 22 Road E point108 108 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point110 110 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point111 111 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point112 112 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point113 113 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point114 114 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point115 115 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point116 116 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point117 117 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point118 118 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point119 119 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point120 120 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point121 121 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point122 122 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point123 123 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point124 124 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point125 125 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point126 126 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point127 127 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point128 128 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point129 129 49 25 1 25 1 25 0 0 0 0 point109 109 Road A point130 130 233 25 5 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point132 132 233 25 5 25 2 25 0 0 0 0C:\TNM25\Projects\The Farm\Horizon Year with Project 4
INPUT: TRAFFIC FOR LAeq1h VolumesThe Farm point133 133 233 25 5 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point134 134 233 25 5 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point135 135 233 25 5 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point136 136 233 25 5 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point137 137 233 25 5 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point138 138 233 25 5 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point139 139 233 25 5 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point140 140 233 25 5 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point141 141 233 25 5 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point142 142 233 25 5 25 2 25 0 0 0 0 point131 131C:\TNM25\Projects\The Farm\Horizon Year with Project 5
INPUT: RECEIVERSThe FarmDudek 19 June 2019 CB TNM 2.5 INPUT: RECEIVERS PROJECT/CONTRACT:The Farm RUN:Horizon Year With Project ReceiverNameNo.#DUsCoordinates (ground)HeightInput Sound Levels and Criteria ActiveXYZaboveExistingImpact Criteria NRinGroundLAeq1hLAeq1hSub'lGoalCalc.ft ft ft ft dBA dBA dB dB ST1 1 1 4,228.2 801.6 0.00 4.92 64.00 66 10.0 8.0Y ST4 2 1 5,679.8 2,346.1 0.00 4.92 52.50 66 10.0 8.0Y ST2 3 1 4,384.1 3,690.0 0.00 4.92 43.10 66 10.0 8.0Y ST3 4 1 6,696.9 5,901.7 0.00 4.92 42.20 66 10.0 8.0Y C:\TNM25\Projects\The Farm\Horizon Year with Project 1
Appendix D
Operation Scenarios - Events at The Barn and The Meadow
Prepared by Dudek (Project # 11872)Sample Scenario: Hypothetical "Concert" Venue at The Barn + The Social (two pole-mounted speakers, broadcast to attendance of approx. 300 guests)1/17/2020
041821231642052462873283694104514925335746156566977387798208619029439841025106611071148118912301271131213531394143514761517155815991640168117221763180418451886192719682009205020912132217322141 51 59 51 60 59 52 52 59 52 52 53 60 60 53 53 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 52 62 60 60 60 60 59 59 59 59 59 58 58 58 58
2 58 51 51 52 52 59 52 52 52 53 53 60 53 53 53 61 61 61 61 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 61 61 61 61 61 52 61 60 62 60 60 60 59 61 59 59 59 58 58 58
3 51 51 59 52 52 52 53 53 53 53 53 53 53 54 54 61 61 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 61 61 52 61 61 60 51 60 60 60 59 59 59 59 59 58 58
4 51 52 52 59 52 53 53 53 53 53 53 54 54 54 61 62 62 62 62 62 62 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 61 52 61 61 61 59 60 60 60 59 59 59 59 59 58
5 52 59 52 52 52 53 53 53 53 54 54 54 61 62 62 62 62 62 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 62 62 62 62 62 61 61 52 61 61 52 60 60 60 59 59 59 59 59
6 52 52 52 53 53 53 53 53 54 54 54 54 55 54 62 62 62 63 63 63 63 63 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 63 63 63 63 63 63 62 62 62 62 62 61 52 61 61 52 52 60 60 59 59 59 59
7 53 53 53 53 53 53 54 54 54 54 54 55 55 55 55 63 63 63 63 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 63 63 63 63 63 62 62 62 62 61 52 61 52 60 52 60 60 59 59 59
8 53 53 53 53 53 54 54 54 54 55 55 55 55 55 55 63 63 64 64 64 64 64 64 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 64 64 64 64 64 63 63 63 63 62 62 62 53 61 61 52 52 60 51 60 60 59 59
9 53 53 53 53 54 54 54 54 55 55 55 55 56 56 56 65 64 64 64 64 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 64 64 64 64 63 63 63 63 62 62 62 53 61 52 52 60 52 60 59 59
10 53 53 54 54 54 54 54 55 55 55 55 56 56 56 56 57 64 64 65 65 65 65 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 65 65 65 65 65 64 64 64 63 63 63 63 62 53 62 53 61 52 52 52 60 60 59
11 53 54 54 54 54 54 55 55 55 56 56 56 56 57 66 57 66 65 65 65 66 66 66 66 66 67 67 67 67 66 66 66 66 66 66 65 65 65 64 64 64 63 63 63 63 54 62 53 53 61 52 52 52 60 60
12 54 54 54 55 55 55 55 55 56 56 56 57 57 66 58 58 58 65 66 66 66 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 66 66 66 65 65 65 64 64 64 63 63 63 54 62 53 53 61 52 52 52 60 60
13 54 54 54 55 55 55 55 56 56 56 57 57 57 58 58 58 58 59 66 67 67 67 67 68 68 68 68 68 68 68 68 68 67 67 67 66 66 66 65 65 65 64 64 63 63 54 62 53 53 53 61 52 52 52 52
14 54 54 55 55 55 56 56 56 56 57 57 58 58 58 59 59 59 59 60 67 68 68 68 68 69 69 69 69 69 69 68 68 68 68 67 67 67 66 66 65 65 64 64 64 63 54 63 54 53 53 53 52 52 52 60
15 54 55 55 55 56 56 56 56 57 57 57 58 58 59 59 60 60 60 61 61 68 69 69 69 69 70 70 70 70 69 69 69 69 68 68 67 67 67 66 66 65 65 64 55 64 63 54 54 53 53 53 53 52 52 51
16 55 55 55 56 56 56 57 57 57 58 58 58 59 59 60 60 60 61 61 62 62 69 70 70 70 71 71 71 71 70 70 70 69 69 69 68 68 67 67 66 66 65 65 64 64 55 54 54 62 53 53 53 53 52 52
17 55 55 55 56 56 57 57 57 58 58 58 59 59 60 60 61 61 62 62 63 63 70 71 71 71 72 72 72 72 72 71 71 70 70 69 69 68 68 67 57 66 65 65 65 55 55 63 54 54 53 53 53 53 52 52
18 55 55 56 56 56 57 57 58 58 59 59 60 60 60 61 62 62 62 63 64 64 65 72 72 73 73 73 73 73 73 72 72 71 71 70 69 69 68 67 58 66 66 65 56 64 55 55 54 54 54 53 53 53 53 53
19 55 55 56 56 57 57 58 58 59 59 60 60 61 61 62 62 63 64 64 65 66 66 73 73 74 74 75 75 74 74 74 73 72 71 71 70 69 69 68 58 57 57 66 56 64 55 55 54 54 54 54 53 53 53 53
20 55 55 56 56 57 57 58 58 59 59 60 61 61 62 63 63 64 65 66 66 67 68 68 75 75 76 76 76 76 76 75 74 73 72 71 71 70 69 59 58 58 57 57 56 65 55 56 55 54 54 54 54 53 53 53
21 55 56 56 56 57 57 58 58 59 60 60 61 62 63 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 70 70 77 78 79 79 78 78 77 76 74 73 72 71 61 60 69 59 58 58 66 57 56 56 56 55 54 54 54 54 53 53 52
22 55 64 56 56 65 57 58 59 59 60 61 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 69 70 71 72 72 72 72 80 82 82 82 80 79 77 76 74 73 62 61 60 60 59 58 58 58 57 56 56 56 55 55 54 54 54 54 53 53
23 55 56 56 65 57 58 58 59 59 68 61 62 62 63 74 65 67 69 81 83 73 75 75 74 74 83 84 84 84 83 81 79 77 65 64 62 62 61 61 59 59 58 58 58 57 56 56 56 55 55 54 54 54 53 52
24 55 56 56 56 57 58 58 59 59 60 61 62 63 64 74 76 78 80 83 85 76 ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### 87 88 87 85 83 69 67 65 64 64 62 62 61 60 60 59 58 58 57 56 57 56 55 55 55 55 54 54 53
25 55 56 56 56 57 57 58 59 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 76 78 81 84 ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### 91 94 91 76 73 71 69 67 66 64 63 62 62 61 60 59 59 58 58 57 57 56 56 55 55 55 54 54 54
26 55 56 56 56 57 58 58 59 59 60 61 62 63 64 74 76 79 82 84 ##### 94 ##### ##### ##### ##### 88 94 ##### ##### ##### ##### 73 70 68 66 65 64 63 62 61 60 59 59 58 58 57 57 56 56 55 55 55 54 54 54
27 55 56 56 56 57 57 58 59 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 76 78 81 84 ##### 91 94 91 77 ##### 87 91 94 ##### ##### ##### 72 70 68 66 65 63 62 62 61 60 59 59 58 58 57 57 56 56 55 55 55 54 54 54
28 55 55 56 56 57 57 58 58 59 60 61 61 62 63 74 76 78 80 83 ##### ##### 88 87 85 86 85 87 88 87 75 ##### 72 69 67 66 64 63 62 62 61 60 59 59 58 58 57 57 56 56 55 55 55 54 54 54
29 55 55 56 65 57 57 58 58 65 68 60 61 62 63 74 75 77 79 81 ##### ##### 85 ##### 84 ##### 84 ##### 85 84 74 73 71 68 67 65 64 63 62 61 61 60 59 59 58 58 57 56 56 56 55 55 55 54 54 54
30 55 63 56 56 65 57 64 58 59 65 60 61 62 63 64 74 76 77 79 80 ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### 82 ##### ##### ##### 68 66 65 63 63 62 61 60 60 59 59 58 58 57 57 56 55 55 55 55 54 54 54
31 55 55 55 56 56 57 57 58 59 59 60 61 61 62 63 64 74 76 77 78 79 80 80 80 80 80 ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### 66 65 64 63 62 61 60 60 60 59 58 58 57 57 57 56 56 55 55 55 54 54 54
32 55 55 55 56 56 57 57 58 58 59 60 60 61 62 63 72 73 75 76 77 77 78 78 78 78 78 78 78 77 77 71 70 65 64 63 62 62 61 60 59 59 58 58 58 57 57 56 56 56 55 55 54 54 54 53
33 54 55 55 56 56 57 57 58 58 59 59 60 61 61 72 73 73 74 75 75 76 76 76 76 76 76 76 76 76 75 75 69 69 62 61 62 61 60 60 59 59 58 58 57 56 56 56 56 55 55 55 54 54 54 53
34 54 55 55 56 56 56 57 57 58 58 65 60 60 61 67 68 73 73 74 74 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 74 74 73 68 61 67 60 61 60 65 59 58 58 57 57 56 56 56 55 55 54 54 54 54 54 53
35 55 55 55 55 56 56 57 57 64 58 65 65 66 66 67 71 72 72 73 73 73 74 74 74 74 74 74 74 73 73 73 68 68 60 66 66 65 65 59 59 64 58 57 57 56 56 55 55 55 54 54 54 53 54 53
36 55 55 55 55 56 56 63 57 57 64 64 65 65 66 66 71 67 71 72 72 72 73 73 73 73 73 73 73 72 72 72 71 71 67 66 66 65 65 64 58 58 57 63 56 56 56 55 55 54 54 54 53 53 53 53
37 54 55 55 55 55 56 56 57 63 64 64 64 65 65 66 66 67 67 68 68 72 72 72 72 72 72 72 72 72 71 71 71 66 66 66 65 65 57 64 64 57 57 57 56 56 55 55 55 54 54 54 53 53 53 52
38 54 55 55 55 55 56 56 63 63 63 64 64 65 65 65 66 66 67 67 67 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 70 70 70 69 65 65 64 64 64 56 63 56 56 56 56 55 55 55 54 54 54 53 53 52 52
39 54 54 61 55 56 55 62 62 57 63 63 64 59 65 65 59 66 66 66 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 69 69 59 65 64 58 64 63 56 56 55 56 56 61 54 54 54 54 54 60 59 53 52 52
40 54 54 55 55 55 56 62 56 57 57 57 58 58 64 59 59 59 66 60 67 66 70 60 67 70 67 67 70 69 67 67 69 67 58 58 68 57 57 57 56 56 56 56 62 55 54 54 54 54 53 59 59 59 52 52
41 54 54 55 55 55 55 56 56 56 57 57 57 58 58 58 59 59 59 59 59 60 60 60 60 60 67 67 67 67 67 66 66 66 66 66 57 57 57 56 56 57 57 56 56 55 54 54 54 54 60 59 53 59 59 53
50-55 dBA < 50 dBA Scale: this box = 300 feet> 80 dBA 75-80 dBA 70-75 dBA 65-70 dBA 60-65 dBA 55-60 dBA
The Event Barn
Lawn Wall
The Social
Speaker #2The Barn
Speaker #1
Crowd Cluster of ~43
Spectators
(typical of 7)
TheBarn_ops-noise_02_mcs011020 The Farm in Poway - Technical Noise Report - Appendix D 20x20ft_grid; predicted noise levels on a horizontal plane 13' above flat grade
Prepared by Dudek (Project # 11872)Sample Scenario: Hypothetical "Outdoor Concert" Venue at The Meadow (two pole-mounted speakers, broadcast to attendance of approx. 300 guests)1/12/2020
039781171561952342733123513904294685075465856246637027417808198588979369751014105310921131117012091248128713261365140414431482152115601599163816771716175517941833187219111950198920281 52 52 52 52 53 53 53 54 54 54 54 55 55 ##### 56 ##### ##### ##### 50 ##### ##### 58 58 59 59 59 59 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 59 59 59 59 59 58 58 58 57 57 57 56 56 56 55 55 55 54 54
2 52 52 52 53 53 53 53 54 54 54 55 55 55 56 56 56 57 57 58 ##### ##### 59 59 59 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 59 59 59 58 58 58 57 57 57 56 56 56 55 55 55 54
3 52 52 52 53 53 53 54 54 54 55 55 55 56 56 56 57 57 58 58 58 59 59 59 60 60 60 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 60 60 60 59 59 59 58 58 57 57 57 56 56 56 55 55 54
4 52 52 52 53 53 53 54 54 54 55 55 55 56 56 57 57 57 58 58 59 59 60 60 60 61 61 61 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 61 61 61 60 60 59 59 59 58 58 57 57 57 56 56 55 55 55
5 52 52 53 53 53 54 54 54 55 55 55 56 56 57 57 57 58 58 59 59 60 60 61 61 62 62 62 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 62 62 62 61 61 60 60 60 59 59 58 58 57 57 56 56 56 55 55
6 52 52 53 53 53 54 54 54 55 55 56 56 56 57 57 58 58 59 59 60 60 61 61 62 62 63 63 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 63 63 63 62 62 61 60 60 59 59 58 58 57 57 57 56 56 55 55
7 52 53 53 53 53 54 54 55 55 55 56 56 57 57 57 58 58 59 60 60 61 61 62 62 63 64 64 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 64 64 63 63 62 62 61 60 60 59 59 58 58 57 57 56 56 56 55
8 52 53 53 53 54 54 54 55 55 55 56 56 57 57 58 58 59 59 60 60 61 62 62 63 64 65 65 66 66 67 67 67 66 66 66 65 64 64 63 62 62 61 60 60 59 59 58 58 57 57 56 56 55
9 52 53 53 53 54 54 54 55 55 56 56 56 57 57 58 58 59 60 60 61 62 62 63 64 65 66 66 67 68 68 68 68 68 68 67 66 65 64 64 63 62 61 61 60 59 59 58 58 57 57 56 56 55
10 52 53 53 53 54 54 54 55 55 56 56 57 57 58 58 59 59 60 61 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 70 71 70 70 69 68 67 66 65 64 63 63 62 61 60 60 59 58 58 57 57 56 56 56
11 52 53 53 53 54 54 55 55 55 56 56 57 57 58 58 59 60 60 61 62 62 63 64 65 67 68 69 71 72 73 73 73 72 71 70 69 67 66 65 64 63 62 61 61 60 59 59 58 58 57 57 56 56
12 53 53 53 54 54 54 55 55 55 56 56 57 57 58 58 59 60 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 68 69 71 73 74 76 76 76 75 74 72 70 68 67 66 64 63 62 62 61 60 59 59 58 58 57 57 56 56
13 53 53 53 54 54 54 55 55 56 56 56 57 57 58 59 59 60 61 61 62 63 64 65 67 69 71 73 75 76 78 79 79 77 76 74 71 69 68 66 65 64 63 62 61 60 60 59 58 58 57 57 56 56
14 53 53 53 54 54 54 55 55 56 56 56 57 57 58 59 59 60 61 61 62 63 64 66 67 69 72 ##### 76 78 82 85 83 80 77 75 72 70 68 66 65 64 63 62 61 60 60 59 58 58 57 57 56 56
15 53 53 53 54 54 54 55 55 56 56 57 57 58 58 59 59 60 61 62 62 63 65 66 68 70 72 75 77 80 85 ##### 87 83 79 76 73 70 68 67 65 64 63 62 61 60 60 59 58 58 57 57 56 56
16 53 53 53 54 54 54 55 55 56 56 57 57 58 58 59 59 60 61 62 62 63 65 66 68 70 72 ##### 77 79 83 87 ##### 85 79 76 73 71 68 67 65 64 63 62 61 60 60 59 58 58 57 57 56 56
17 53 53 53 54 54 54 55 55 56 56 56 57 57 58 59 59 60 61 62 62 63 65 66 68 69 72 74 76 78 80 83 85 82 78 76 73 70 68 67 65 64 63 62 61 60 60 59 58 58 57 57 56 56
18 53 53 53 54 54 54 55 55 56 56 56 57 57 58 59 59 60 61 61 62 63 64 66 67 69 72 ##### 75 ##### 78 79 80 78 76 74 72 70 68 66 65 64 63 62 61 60 60 59 58 58 57 57 56 56
19 53 53 53 54 54 54 55 55 55 56 56 57 57 58 58 59 60 60 61 62 63 64 65 67 68 70 72 73 75 76 77 77 76 75 ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### 63 63 62 61 60 59 59 58 58 57 57 56 56
20 53 53 53 53 54 54 55 55 55 56 56 57 57 58 58 59 60 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 69 70 72 ##### 74 ##### 75 ##### 73 ##### 69 68 66 65 64 63 62 61 61 60 59 59 58 57 57 56 56 56
21 52 53 53 53 54 54 55 55 55 56 56 57 57 58 58 59 59 60 61 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 69 70 72 72 72 72 72 71 ##### 68 ##### ##### ##### 63 63 62 61 60 60 59 58 58 57 57 56 56 55
22 52 53 53 53 54 54 54 55 55 56 56 56 57 57 58 59 59 60 60 61 62 63 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 69 70 70 69 69 ##### 67 ##### ##### ##### 55 54 61 61 60 59 59 58 58 57 57 56 56 55
23 52 53 53 53 54 54 54 55 55 55 56 56 57 57 58 58 59 59 60 61 61 62 63 63 64 65 66 67 67 68 68 68 67 67 ##### 65 65 56 55 54 54 53 57 60 59 59 58 57 57 57 56 56 55
24 52 53 53 53 54 54 54 55 55 55 56 56 57 57 58 58 59 59 60 60 61 61 62 63 63 64 65 65 66 66 66 66 66 65 ##### 64 64 56 55 54 53 53 52 51 59 58 58 57 57 56 56 55 55
25 52 52 53 53 53 54 54 54 55 55 56 56 56 57 57 58 58 59 59 60 60 61 61 62 63 63 64 64 64 65 65 65 64 64 64 63 63 62 55 54 53 52 52 51 51 55 57 57 57 56 56 55 55
26 52 52 53 53 53 54 54 54 55 55 55 56 56 57 57 57 58 58 59 59 60 60 61 61 62 62 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 62 62 62 61 53 53 52 52 51 50 50 49 57 56 56 55 55 55
27 52 52 53 53 53 53 54 54 54 55 55 56 56 56 57 57 58 58 58 59 59 60 60 61 61 61 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 ##### ##### ##### 60 52 ##### ##### ##### 50 50 49 48 53 53 55 55 55
28 52 52 52 53 53 53 54 54 54 55 55 55 56 56 56 57 57 58 58 58 59 59 60 60 60 61 61 61 61 62 62 62 61 61 61 61 ##### ##### ##### 52 56 ##### ##### ##### 50 49 49 48 48 47 52 55 54
29 52 52 52 53 53 53 53 54 54 54 55 55 55 56 56 57 57 57 58 58 58 59 59 59 60 60 60 60 61 61 61 61 61 61 60 60 53 52 52 51 56 50 51 50 50 50 49 48 48 47 47 52 54
30 52 52 52 52 53 53 53 54 54 54 55 55 55 56 56 56 57 57 57 58 58 58 59 59 59 59 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 59 52 51 51 51 58 50 50 50 49 49 48 47 47 47 46 46
31 51 52 52 52 53 53 53 53 54 54 54 55 55 55 56 56 56 57 57 57 57 58 58 58 59 59 59 59 59 59 59 59 59 59 59 59 59 52 51 50 50 50 54 49 49 49 49 48 48 47 46 46 46
32 51 52 52 52 52 53 53 53 53 54 54 54 55 55 55 56 56 56 56 57 57 57 58 58 58 58 58 58 59 59 59 59 59 59 58 58 58 58 51 50 50 49 49 48 49 48 48 48 48 47 46 46 46
33 51 51 52 52 52 52 53 53 53 54 54 54 54 55 55 55 56 56 56 56 57 57 57 57 57 58 58 58 58 58 58 58 58 58 58 58 58 57 51 50 49 49 49 56 47 48 48 48 47 47 47 46 45
34 51 51 52 52 52 52 53 53 53 53 54 54 54 54 55 55 55 55 56 56 56 56 57 57 57 57 57 57 57 57 58 58 57 57 57 57 57 57 54 50 49 49 48 48 55 47 48 47 47 47 47 46 45
35 51 51 51 52 52 52 52 53 53 53 53 54 54 54 54 55 55 55 55 56 56 56 56 56 56 57 57 57 57 57 57 57 57 57 57 57 57 56 56 49 49 49 48 48 53 52 47 47 47 47 46 46 46
36 51 51 51 51 52 52 52 52 53 53 53 53 54 54 54 54 55 55 55 55 55 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 57 57 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 49 49 48 48 47 47 52 46 47 46 46 46 46 46
37 51 51 51 51 52 52 52 52 52 53 53 53 53 54 54 54 54 54 55 55 55 55 55 55 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 55 53 48 48 48 47 47 47 54 51 46 46 46 46 45
38 50 51 51 51 51 52 52 52 52 52 53 53 53 53 53 54 54 54 54 54 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 56 56 56 56 56 56 55 55 55 55 55 55 48 48 48 47 47 46 46 45 45 46 45 45 45
39 50 51 51 51 51 51 52 52 52 52 52 53 53 53 53 53 54 54 54 54 54 54 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 52 48 47 47 47 46 46 53 50 45 45 45 45
75-80 dBA 70-75 dBA < 50 dBA65-70 dBA 60-65 dBA 55-60 dBA 50-55 dBA Scale: this box = 300 feet> 80 dBA
Speaker #2Speaker #1
Crowd Cluster of ~43
Spectators
(typical of 7)
Onsite Residential Privacy/
Noise Wall (8' tall)
Planned New Onsite "Meadow"
Residential Home
(typical of six shown)
TheMeadow_ops-noise_01_mcs011020 The Farm in Poway - Technical Noise Report - Appendix D 20x20ft_grid; predicted noise levels on a horizontal plane 13' above flat grade